Let us customize the names of the statuses. Specifically I want to change "Under Review" to "Researching" or "Scoping". "Under Review" sounds like the post is under review and might get deleted
I want a provision to help my customers understand when is the feature planned for go live. Example 'Planned in Q1' 'Planned in Q2' etc.
I'm curious what the rationale is for set statuses as opposed to allowing custom ones. For example, I could see how marking something as Alpa or Beta could be useful in some cases or planned for Q3, etc.
@Seth Killian: Hi Seth, we always err towards simplicity. Adding complexity where it's not necessary adds potential for confusion and slows us down.
We haven't built this because we haven't heard super compelling use cases yet.
@sarah-hum:
As it happens the statuses are actually pretty much OK for me.
But...depending on the product/service an org has the statuses can be significantly different to the standard ones provided in Canny.
The simplicity is nice and maybe it just has to work for a lot of folks. But not being able to be more granular /change these will affect future functions that are inevitably coming in Canny.
So reporting does not exist in Canny right now. You will want to get as much tag, class, category, status, build, versions, use case info in place before reporting is released.
I.e. How many items are at:
- in progress / completed
- in period x where
- tag 1 and 2 were checked and where
- our customers paying more than y voted for them
Plus, using machine learning with 00s/000s of enhancements over time you might want to build a smart suggestions function, which says to a user which types of things reduce churn / lead to more sales if these are recorded on items.
“Won’t Fix” “Not a Bug”
@Andrew Rasmussen - Just connected with our new Director PM. To echo Zeb's thoughts, we want a similar "On Hold" status. "Open" currently reflects posts awaiting votes and those that have support but we're not doing. It's confusing to agents understandably. We'd like "On Hold" to reflect "Hey we've seen this but are not currently planning it. Keep voting though and we'll reconsider." Thanks.
I am looking to add additional statuses such as Near Term and Long Term to the roadmap to give users more clarity on our plans and when planned things will be delivered
Thanks @Nicholas Merican! Sounds like this post is more specific for what you're looking for: https://feedback.canny.io/feature-requests/p/status-updates-dates
We'd like a way to say: "This feature is code-complete, but it's released in an alpha-release / nightly"
@Norbert de Langen: I see. We try to be very careful with which statuses we choose to promote to the main roadmap. In your case, I'd recommend just leaving a comment saying that the feature is ready for testing. Everyone who voted will get a notification.
@Sarah Hum:
I want to signal to users their requested feature is available for testing.
@Norbert de Langen: Hey Norbert, any reason why "In Progress" doesn't work for you?
We really need a way to say "Not planned" (ie. not going to do right now).
@Andrew Rasmussen: Hey Andrew! Hope you guys are living the dream traveling still!
We could use "Closed" but it just doesn't really categorize it well in my opinion. Also we would still like to have it visible to users so they can add feedback, while being transparent in that feature is not planned.
We currently used "closed" for things like user error, or things that already exist. We just have tons of requests and it's hard to sift through them all, but I think a "not planned" status would help us in that.
But I hear your reasoning completely and I understand why you want them to remain the same and simple, we struggle with this too haha and I'm always the one that wants to keep them the required statuses static: https://feedback.clickup.com/feature-requests/p/change-default-required-statuses
@Zeb: Hey Zeb!
For posts that we don't plan on doing right now, we just leave them open. This lets us measure interest, in case we want to build the feature in the future.
For posts that we never plan on doing, we mark them as "Closed". This communicates you won't be building the feature, and gives you an opportunity to explain why.
Does this for you, or do you still feel like a "Not Planned" status would solve some problems for you?
@Zeb: I definitely see the value in "Not Planned", since I often use "Closed" for the same thing you mention: invalid tasks, errors, or things that already exist.
I want this,too!
We have a status of "Pilot", where a feature is released but in BETA for a select group of users, would be great to have this status, as the feature isn't "Complete" until it is out of BETA and released to the rest of our network.