You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 2, 2024. It is now read-only.
Would it be possible to support a "reverse" split (e.g. move the tasks that are done to a new PBI and keep the original PBI with the work that is not done yet)?
The reason behind it: related work done outside of Azure DevOps (like linking commits to the story etc) could then keep using the original ID.
There was also a somewhat related request under Q&A below about the commits - in my interpretation of the split, all commits would be either linked to both PBIs or would stay with the original one (which will be used to continue work).
PS if this one is supported, i suspect #8 will automatically be addressed as original PBI also keeps its backlog order.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I agree, I think this would solve a lot of complaints that we get, people would much prefer to keep using the original ID in the new sprint.
Good idea!
vitpace
changed the title
"Reverse" Split (work in progress remains in original PBI)?
"Reverse" Split (work in progress stays in original PBI)?
Aug 14, 2020
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hi there,
Would it be possible to support a "reverse" split (e.g. move the tasks that are done to a new PBI and keep the original PBI with the work that is not done yet)?
The reason behind it: related work done outside of Azure DevOps (like linking commits to the story etc) could then keep using the original ID.
There was also a somewhat related request under Q&A below about the commits - in my interpretation of the split, all commits would be either linked to both PBIs or would stay with the original one (which will be used to continue work).
PS if this one is supported, i suspect #8 will automatically be addressed as original PBI also keeps its backlog order.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: