MPS priority conventions aren't public #142
Labels
documentation
essential
Will cause failure to meet customer requirements. Assign resources.
git-migration
Project migration from Ravenbrook internal Perforce infrastructure to public git repo
manageability
Affects the cost of managing the MPS project
process
To do with process or procedure
Throughout the MPS documentation, issue database, etc. we use conventions for expressing priority, based on a four-level keyword system: critical, essential, optional, nice. This corresponds to the variant MoSCoW method (but has more precise defintions) and to RFC 2199 keywords for requirements. We also distinguish "importance" from "urgency".
With #98 and GitHub migration these keywords are creeping into other places, like GitHub labels.
We need some clear public definition and guidelines so that people:
See also #98 (comment) about migrating the Perforce "jobspec", which relies on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: