Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove card priority when cleaning Sprint #137

Open
Ana06 opened this issue Nov 9, 2017 · 3 comments
Open

Remove card priority when cleaning Sprint #137

Ana06 opened this issue Nov 9, 2017 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement ✨ Enhancement junior 👶 Easy task, perfect if you don't have much experience with the project

Comments

@Ana06
Copy link
Member

Ana06 commented Nov 9, 2017

When executing cleanup-sprint the cards are moving to the backlog with the priority. It would be great to remove it automatically.

Ana@linux-nt5w:~> trollolo cleanup-sprint --board-id=Fs7boVwI --target-board-id=kCXtUSYN
'/home/Ana/burndown-data-01.yaml' not found. Skipping automatic burndown generation.
moving card "(5) P4: Document BsRequest" to list "Ready for planning"
moving card "(3) P1: Edit sections image and description" to list "Ready for planning"
moving card "(3) P6: UI request diff truncate hint missing" to list "Ready for planning"
moving card "(8) P2: Studio Express Workflow" to list "Ready for planning"
@Ana06 Ana06 added enhancement ✨ Enhancement help wanted 💕 PRs are welcome! Just comment in the issue saying you are working on it junior 👶 Easy task, perfect if you don't have much experience with the project labels Nov 9, 2017
@cornelius
Copy link
Member

Often it's helpful to still have the priorities there after the cleanup so you can for example reestimate them and put them back into the backlog in the same order as before. So I would suggest to add this as an option --remove-priorities to the command.

@Ana06 Ana06 removed the help wanted 💕 PRs are welcome! Just comment in the issue saying you are working on it label Feb 17, 2018
@Ana06
Copy link
Member Author

Ana06 commented Feb 17, 2018

I would do it the other way around, removing them automatically and have a command to keep priorities. 🤔

@cornelius
Copy link
Member

My rationale for requiring the user to explicitly call the option for removing the priority is that this is a destructive operation and that defaults should be non-destructive. There is no way to get the priorities back once they are removed so when the user has to add the option to remove them there are no surprises which can't be undone.

This has to be balanced with ease of use, though. The common case should usually be the default. I'm not clear what would be the common case here. We have two data points, your team which would remove them and my team which would probably keep them.

Another alternative would be to make the operation non-destructive for example by providing an undo feature. This probably would be overengineering in this case. But maybe there is a lightweight variant such as writing a log of the operations from where you can see what has been removed and you could restore it manually if needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement ✨ Enhancement junior 👶 Easy task, perfect if you don't have much experience with the project
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants