← Back to team overview

launchpad-users team mailing list archive

Re: Rethinking bug lifecycles


On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Daniel Hollocher
<danielhollocher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's quite possible that this thinking might prompt us to consider
>> changing Launchpad, perhaps in significant ways. (e.g. one proposal is
>> to combine "Confirmed" and "Triaged").
>  One idea that I have had in the back of my mind is to have an upstream
> setting for a bug.
> Right now, my understanding is that a bug is marked triaged, low priority,
> possibly assigned to a team, and an external bug watch is created.
> I feel bad when users see all that, but have no idea it means that the bug
> should be worked on upstream and get frustrated because it looks like the
> bug is being ignored.  A common rant is "why is this bug marked low!?  It
> should be marked high."
> So if it was clearer that a bug is upstream, like in the same way bug
> duplicates are handled, then users can direct their energy
> more appropriately.

Thanks, that's a good idea.

Although, my experience is that if you are going to be open about your
development priorities, you will always disappoint someone. :)