要求工具内置投票系统？
是否有内置投票系统的需求收集工具？ 使用分类的效果并不好，因为土地法由最后审查的人拥有最终决定权。 这是为解决项目需求阶段意见分歧而提出的解决方案。 委员会设计是一种众所周知的反模式。 有一个标准的“技巧”，可以将事物归类为“值得拥有”，并为其他人提供机会，让他们认识到某些需求缺乏价值。 不幸的是，允许民主决策过程的请求似乎太合理了，无法拒绝。
Are there any requirements gathering tools that have a voting system built in? Using categorization is not working well as the law of the land has been whomever reviewed it last has the final say. This has been a proposed solution to settle differences in opinion during the requirements phase of a project. Design by committee is a well known antipattern. There is a standard 'trick' of categorizing things as nice to have and providing an opportunity for others to realize the lack of value certain requirements have. Unfortunately the request to allow a democratic decision process seems too reasonable to refuse.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
Jira 是一个问题跟踪器和整体项目管理系统，我发现它运行良好。 它有投票权。
Jira is an issue tracker and overall project management system that I have found works quiet well. It has voting.
Playground 内置投票功能，是专门为需求获取和组织而设计的工具（披露：我是所有者/开发商）
但是 - 在大多数情况下，利益相关者没有平等的投票权 - 他们中的一些人拥有更高的权威和决策权。 当从外部“外包想法”时，投票的使用最为成功 - 请参阅 UserVoice。 在内部项目和客户项目中，您只需构建客户想要的任何内容即可。
Playground has voting built-in, and it is a tool specifically designed for requirements elicitation and organization (disclosure: I am the owner/developer)
However - in most situations, stakeholders do NOT have equal votes - some of them have a higher authority and decision-making power. Voting can be most successfully used when "outsourcing ideas" from the outside - see UserVoice. On internal as well as client projects, you simply build whatever the client desires.
Bugzilla 虽然是一个问题跟踪器而不是需求收集工具，但它也有一个投票机制。
Bugzilla, while an issue tracker rather than a requirements gathering tool, also has a voting mechanism.