[oslc-cm] Updates on severity/priority property definitions

[Steve K Speicher]

Olivier Berger <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu> wrote on 09/10/2012 
05:09:42 PM:

> From: Olivier Berger <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu>
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, 
> Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date: 09/10/2012 05:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-cm] Updates on severity/priority property definitions
> 
> Hi.
> 
> Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> > Sam and I had a working session with Arthur Ryman on the proposal to 
add 
> > priority and serverity to OSLC-CM [1].  I think we have a good 
proposal 
> > the handles most if not all scenarios.
> >
> > To make it easier to view the differences, I created a new section 
> > "Details (New)" with the new proposal that has these new and nice 
> > qualities:
> > - Introduced class of cm:Priority and cm:Severity. cm:priority has a 
range 
> > of cm:Priority and cm:severity has a range of cm:Severity.
> > - CM spec defines 4 instances of cm:Severity as: cm:Major, cm:Normal, 
> > cm:Minor, cm:SeverityUndefined (names could be tweaked)
> > - CM spec defines 4 instances of cm:Priority as: cm:High, cm:Medium, 
> > cm:Low, cm:PriorityUndefined (names could be tweaked)
> > - Any custom value should be of type cm:Severity or cm:Priority
> > - To relate OSLC-defined values to custom ones, we'll use the 
predicate 
> > skos:narrower
> >
> > Let's plan on discussing at the September 13th telecon.
> >
> > [1] - http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmPropsSeverityPriority
> >
> 
> I may not be available for the telecon, and sorry if I missed past
> discussions on the subject (a bit too far away from OSLC these days).

Very good to hear from you.

> Have you evaluated the mapping of current common bug trackers
> configurations WRT the proposed severities or priorities ?
>
> I'm afraid these may not always map the existing defaults in bugzilla,
> jira, mantis, etc. (which could be tweaked at instances by
> administrators, most of the time).
> 
> I'm not sure how that would fit, but there can always be subclassing of
> the cm:Priority and cm:Severity for local variants... and it would be
> good the specs/docs illustrate how to do that for say, your local
> FusionForge trackers ;)
> 

Not in much detail for some time but agree we should flush this out. 
Picking JIRA, RTC, Bugzilla and Mantis seem like a good set...volunteers?

> Btw, Wishlist/"Feature request" is sometimes a particular severity,
> IIRC, so implementers would have to pay attention to that particular
> case of course.

Right, do you have any samples of this?  I could dig around I suppose.

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net