Jasper Siegmund

My feedback

  1. 4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund supported this idea  · 
  2. 16 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund supported this idea  · 
  3. 175 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    I almost hear 3 feedback items here:
    1) Service hooks to integrate with other tools such as Slack, MSTeams etc.
    - This makes sense.

    2) Simple notifications on page updates
    2.1) Ability to follow a page to accomplish (2) i.e get notifications on page updates
    - This resonates with me a lot. I think we need to introduce Follow for a wiki page.

    3) Notifications when anything in the whole Wiki repo is updated. I feel this is a more admin rather than a user level feature .. am I thinking right?

    Jasper Siegmund commented  · 

    You might want to check out how it's being done in Confluence, that's nicely done. Content edit would be the most important one, but I guess a notification for the other items wouldn't hurt either (and those should be much less frequent). It's nice to include the content (or a good overview of what's changed) when the notification is being sent as an e-mail. Perhaps have the user set a preference if they want to receive notifications per e-mail, or as a toast in ADO.

    Jasper Siegmund commented  · 

    I'd say that to implement 2), you'll need some actionable event any way, so that would make implementing 1) rather trivial. For us, the priority lies with 2 as it would be very handy to get updates when a team member updates a specific page. For our team, 3) would not be used probably.

    Jasper Siegmund supported this idea  · 
  4. 4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund commented  · 

    I completely agree. I use the export/import option for Release Definitions in order to use Process Variables. But when you import a definition it automatically creates a copy, which means you lose the history for the existing release definition and have to start all over again. And any dashboards that might rely on this definition will also break. It would be far nicer if there was a checkbox there that says "overwrite any existing definition with a new version". We have history for these definition anyway, right?

    Jasper Siegmund supported this idea  · 
  5. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund shared this idea  · 
  6. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund shared this idea  · 
  7. 595 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jasper Siegmund commented  · 

    Interesting topic as we're facing similar problems as well. In the comment of Brian Harry (Jan 18 2017) it's mentioned that some features would be coming in preview soon. So did I miss something? Are these already there? We have a similar set-up as others have. A single (6-person) dev team that supports multiple applications. I want to have each application as a project in VS but all of the work stuff should be combined. The best option I could think of is to create one project that doesn't have any code but is just there for work item tracking and creating the application projects separately for repo, build, release, all that kind of stuff. But the way things inside of a project are linked created some additional work when following this approach.

Feedback and Knowledge Base