[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question
From: |
Karsten Hilbert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question |
Date: |
Sat, 4 Apr 2009 00:26:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 02:49:03PM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:
> Until we would have extra coders with the tome or sophistication to add
> drag-and-drop
Adding drag-and-drop isn't all too much of a problem. It's
more a problem of devising a sane strategy for ordering.
What does one actually want ? *Order*ing or *Group*ing or
both ? Automatic (we already have that but the applied
logic doesn't please everyone) or manual ?
The only reasonable thing to expect for 0.5 might be to
either allow manually assigning explicit integer weights or
to auto-assign a list-position based on drag-and-drop.
People might want to hash out how they want issues to be
grouped and/or ordered. Then we can decide how to
technically approach that.
Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
- [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Sebastian Hilbert, 2009/04/02
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Jim Busser, 2009/04/02
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/02
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/03
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Rogerio Luz, 2009/04/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Rogerio Luz, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Jim Busser, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Jim Busser, 2009/04/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] terminology question, Karsten Hilbert, 2009/04/05