launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

["Francis J. Lacoste" <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Martin,

Thanks for the summary, but I think there are a few things that I understood 
differently.

On January 6, 2011, Martin Pool wrote:
> I like this too.  Here is the what I understand to be the short form of it:
> 
>  * only three buckets: critical (drop everything), high, and low

Critical isn't 'drop everything'. It's a 'Do first'. Only 'operational 
incidents' are drop everything and aren't directly track in the bug tracker.

With this new triage policy, we are decoupling the bug triaging from the 
incident handling. As such, we should rename the DefinitionOfCriticalPolicy 
page to DefinitionOfIncidents.


>  * importance reflects priority (order we will do them), and only
> indirectly severity (user impact)
>  * priority is determined by: user impact, impact on project health,
> impact on key stakeholders, general judgement...
>  * oopses and timeouts are high

From Robert clarifications, I think they are 'Critical'.

>  * a regression of something that was previously working is more
> likely to be high than if the feature never worked at all

Same thing here.

>  * the high bugs are all of approximately equally importance: if we
> would find it disappointing if bug X was done before bug Y, X must be
> marked low
>  * therefore squads in bugfix mode can take whatever high priority bug
> they see first or whatever they think is easiest

They should clear the Critical buckets first, but yes.

>  * bugfix squads should basically never do low-priority unless they
> are genuinely trivial to do as part of another fix

That's already the case.

>  * squads in feature mode can fix whatever bugs are relevant to their
> feature, but they can't mark their feature Done until there are no
> more relevant (tagged) high bugs
>  * every developer has some discretionary time in which they can fix
> whatever will increase their happiness with the project, regardless of
> normal priority
>  * the high bucket will be softly capped at about as many bugs as can
> be done in 6 months (ie 400-1000)
>  * it is of course fine to move, or talk about moving, a bug up or
> down the scale
> 
> One thing here that wasn't mentioned: confirmed vs triaged.  I think
> this would be a great opportunity to start using just one of those
> statuses.  (But perhaps that's a separate issue.)


We area already supposed to only use Triaged.

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.