Re: [jbosstools-dev] ACTION REQUIRED: Migration to jgit timestamps and sprint-based fixversions

Nick, I also think that the new long names are too "noise". Too many numbers. It's hard to read. Month is enough IMO even if we have two sprints for the same month. I understand that we all can have different preferences. And what is hard to read for us may provide additional useful information for you or someone else. This is why it's very important to discuss such changes first and got to agreement *before* changing it. Can you just revert it for now then we can discuss it later? On 06/22/2016 01:43 PM, Nick Boldt wrote: > I disagree. > > Using the "main month in the sprint to give an idea" is a far less > useful piece of information than the actual start/end dates, which > give you the ACTUAL dates at a glance. > > When sprints cross months, as most do, which month should be > selected? > The start month? the end month? or the one that makes up the largest > percentage in the sprint? > > If you feel it's too much information, just glance away. >