launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Aaron Bentley <aaron@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11-08-19 04:12 PM, Francis J. Lacoste wrote:
>> And since Critical doesn't mean "must be fixed now" why is it a
>> work-on-first bucket?  Why do we have a focus on burning it down to
>> zero, at the cost of stalling our high and low bugs?  It seems like
>> allowing us to fix high bugs could improve the overall user experience more.
> 
> Because we (at least I) think these issues are more important than other
> High or Low ones. Quoting Gavin who did a good job of summarizing the
> criteria here:

I understand the criteria, but I think that the attributes of an issue
are less important than what the issue actually is.  For example, 723417
is a regression, but the regression is that a text field is smaller than
it used to be.  823850 is an oops, but you can only get that oops in a
corner case, and it doesn't prevent you from accomplishing anything.

We cannot assess what fixes are going to give the most overall
improvement using our "critical" criteria, because they don't consider
overall impact.  Avoiding an oops for 1 user is nice, but making life
slightly easier for 1000 is better.  Stakeholder escalations seems to be
our only mechanism that considers impact.

> My main concern at this time is the fact that we are getting since April
> 1st 20 new of these bugs per week [1]! Which is about the same number of
> issues we fix on average per week [2]. No wonder the burndown is stalled
> for so long.

Also, it's my impression that most of the low-hanging-fruit critical
bugs have been taken, and the remaining ones are harder and therefore
slower to fix.

> I don't have an explanation of why we are finding each weeks 20 of these
> issues. I also don't have the impression that these are "legacy" issues.
> Many of them comes from new work.

We're also getting some about merge proposals and branch upgrades, which
are features that haven't changed much recently.

> We need to investigate that stream of
> incoming rework and stop it at the source if we ever hope to burn these
> issues down. Once I sort out the recruitment projects I'm working on,
> that's my next project.

Cool.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5SZYUACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI3wBgCcCdsq2KaPg1IzDuP+c6Jz/M1w
gvcAnjs0Ld3t6qfiCdLoC5wUPOhhWC3e
=oMIJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----