Proposed ordering of the backlog AND 3 issues to be added to the agenda

[Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@kth.se>]

As I said in the meeting, I propose to take 5 most relevant issues and to put them onto the TC agenda every meeting no matter what (we can agree to reduce the number of those issues if there are many agenda items otherwise). This is the only way I see us working through that list.

The question raised by Jim and others is what does constitute a good ordering of relevance. Here is the filter I use:

https://issues.oasis-open.org/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20OSLCCORE%20AND%20issuetype%20in%20standardIssueTypes()%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20New)%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC%2C%20updated%20DESC

It features the following:

1) Primary sort by descending priority (deal with pressing matters first)

2) Secondary sort by the ascending creation date (deal with the oldest issues first if the priority is equal)

3) Restrict the list only to the New and Open issues

4) Restrict the list only to the top-level issues (filter out the subtasks)

If we have an agreement on that, here is the list of the issues for the next meeting (we already have 2 items on the agenda):

1) OSLCCORE-53 

2) OSLCCORE-66

3) OSLCCORE-71

Unless we can reproduce the same sorting features on Github, I would suggest to keep using Jira until we work through this backlog.

--
/Andrew