[wildfly-dev] Re: Triage of 'Critical' WFLY and WFCORE issues

Can we do some housekeeping of the open 'Critical' issues in WFCORE and WFLY? 1) Can the assignees and relevant component leads go through them and change the priority for any that aren't truly critical? 2) Simultaneously, we can have a discussion here of what we want 'Critical' to mean going forward. My 2 cents is it needs to have more of a meaning of 'Priority' (which is what the field is), i.e. it gives a clue as to what needs to be worked on next. And less of a meaning of 'subjective importance'. My sense is right now we have a lot of things where 'Critical' means someone thought it was 'Important' but there is no corresponding priority to get it done. At some point that calls into question whether it's truly critical. For 1) above I'm not asking that we have a big discussion and then people can review issues. I'm looking for a quick triage to clean up things where the experts decided 'nah, that's not really critical.' Just try and get rid of some noise so it's easier for new Critical items to stand out. Also, in a preview of coming attractions, I expect later this quarter we'll kick off a more general JIRA housekeeping initiative. This is something that Alessio Soldano suggested last year, and it's sorely needed, but I didn't have time to get anything going. But it's a New Year, and my New Year's Resolution is to tidy this up. Best regards, Brian Stansberry Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP WildFly Project Lead He/Him/His _______________________________________________ wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave(a)lists.jboss.org Privacy Statement: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/privacy-policy List Archives: https://lists.jboss.org/archives/list/wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org/message...