Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F90BE4C6 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 42207 invoked by uid 500); 28 Feb 2013 13:28:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bloodhound-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 42103 invoked by uid 500); 28 Feb 2013 13:28:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact bloodhound-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 42075 invoked by uid 99); 28 Feb 2013 13:28:29 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ryan.ollos@wandisco.com designates 209.85.223.181 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.181] (HELO mail-ie0-f181.google.com) (209.85.223.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:22 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 17so2015716iea.26 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:27:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=LLhl7IIAn/xbn3/aO/cQPerf+mQ2QNlzJv8ngHc4eqs=; b=Av9ND04HP/LKXi1rkvLeHKoKKKR2do1AAa1qisGIPFBNcqROKYlk2O3WWpk9Uj4MGg YXfgca4cdhCQec8jWY+wSOmBiSLHWtTBO7kKdzRqLhqKfO9sjKbcSGcN9DZtRXYmeG0l 4YrZIzzZnvvwI9dYOa0a73KBGPip8B3O9iP6gb1a+FtQZ1kIyJs0sGxgQr30Lps23uuU bae3FkHkPDhx8s2Cn5JPFo4bcPQQ7wztNUzGQMK5G2PGOHUS0qbP0p++qx5L3G8Lpv/1 gpWG1xwZEOM1h+2Hta32RloPzmWB69dfQqF3ayY4uK+72gRVixLJdaXiFx6z7AVQd5gY AiPw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.13.175 with SMTP id i15mr3677514igc.75.1362058079521; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:27:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.19.143 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:27:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <512F31E7.7090805@wandisco.com> References: <512EBD2B.7080402@wandisco.com> <512F31E7.7090805@wandisco.com> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:27:59 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Add Priority: Normal for issue tracker From: Ryan Ollos To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0447f382fe66ac04d6c8db3e X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmRAfDhok6TFPRml1ysVyLtQBIzDoFuFUvX9/zDjo87MMYKCtRmUnnahGuKM2eaylYHBWma X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --f46d0447f382fe66ac04d6c8db3e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Gary Martin wrote: > Perhaps I should not have been so soft on this idea. I really don't see > any advantage big enough in any of the suggestions for me to consider it > worth getting used to a new setup. Instead, I would encourage us to live > with what we have and find some more important issues to solve. > > Committers should feel free to set the priority of an issue if they feel > that the default middle priority level is incorrect. We also effectively > express priority by the placement of an issue in a specific milestone. > Well, disagreements aside, I do agree that this has been way over-discussed relative to its value. I'll move on and pick something else with Priority "major" or higher to work on. --f46d0447f382fe66ac04d6c8db3e--