Feature changed by: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) Feature #302963, revision 19 Title: Rating support for FATE openFATE: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: FATE is becoming a huge database of useless information. Most of this come to the fact that there is only syntantic checking but not social checking. Usecase: Searching and navigating produces lot of: * Duplicate features * Incomplete features (no use cases, examples) * Vague features (a.k.a "#xxxxx YaST should be improved" ) * copy and paste features Features should support rating in the slashdot way (Insightful, Interesting, Informative, Troll, Funny) and rating from 1 to 5. The rating could be used so the same people using FATE could score down low- quality features than only make the process of information flow more difficult. Score threshold could be set by people so only high quality, well specified features are shown. It is important that searching could be done using this ratings. It should be possible to generate rankings over this ratings. Current status FATE does not offer anything to filter low quality features User Experience Query dialog would gain an option for searching. Feature editor would gain a rating dialog where different people would express their rating. Search would be over an average or agregation of this scores. Scores should be saved per rater. Contingency Plan No contingency plan at the software level. At the process level, add comments to every feature lacking business case, detailed description, real benefits, and more important, scope. Documentation Impact: Only needs to be mentioned in the handbook. Test Case: * rate a feature in one or two dimensions (score and category) * search for features >= or <= certain rating Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Threshold for feature processing should save thousands of dollars in wasted time doing ping pong, needinfos for features with incomplete information. Even engineering could be optimized when features with no real business case dissapear by social tagging. Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-04-02 01:26:51) Sounds like an interesting idea for openSUSE. I am looking forward towards considering this for some Phase 2 or so once openFATE (or whatever the name is going to be) is up and running. #3: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-17 16:03:07) (reply to #1) openFATE is now up and running. Can this request be made public to openSUSE.org partner? #2: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-11-14 18:05:55) Michl, for the openFATE work. (For SLE, I expect the PMs to take on much of this.) #4: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-28 16:04:18) This would be great to see. For reference, see https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu with some good ideas. Also a tag cloud like the build service has might be nice. #5: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) (2009-01-28 16:14:23) (reply to #4) We will release a new openFATE version by the end of the week with both voting and tagging support (including a cloud ;)) #7: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-30 20:29:40) (reply to #5) Awesome! #6: Thomas Schmidt (digitaltomm) (2009-01-30 15:12:39) Rating features is available now in openfate with the three options -0 +. Searching for features with or above a certain score is not yet there. Do we need to integrate the voting and search by rating stuff in the FATE client or is this just a community feature? #8: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-31 11:46:14) (reply to #6) Can you please add a voting column to the browse/query result list and allow sorting by it? Atm you seem to be only able to view the top 5 voted requests (on the dashboard). + #10: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) (2009-02-02 11:35:31) (reply to #8) + Yes, it would be useful to see the score already while brosing through + the features. + #9: Michael Loeffler (sprudel24) (2009-02-02 11:34:32) (reply to #6) + Voting is not necessary for the internal client. Internal features + should be more driven by use case and business case. For openFate the + public opinion is more important to know. But the voting score of + external features should be displayed internally. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/302963