More issue states than simply "open" and "closed" - to allow for enforced workflow
Description
Offer the ability to create additional issue states and link them with next/previous state In order to enforce specific workflow. This would allow one to enforce a workflow that looked like this, "open -> dev -> QA -> closed" Use of labels is rather clunky and does not enforce any particular paradigm for how people work.
This does not fall into the realm of the Merge Request as what customers really want to track are the underlying issues.
The idea of an enforced workflow is generally only used at large companies. It would be a good differentiator for EE premium.
Proposal
- Allow administrators to define additional issue states
- Each state can have a 'previous' and 'next' state and these can be 'null' or 'none' so that issues can be propagated from one state to the next or we can allow a free-for-all where no order is enforce. For example:
- 'open' has a 'previous' value of 'none' because there is no previous state but a 'next' value of 'dev' because that is the next state.
- 'QA' has a 'previous' and 'next' value of 'null' because no order is being enforced.
Links / references
Edited by Coung Ngo