maria-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Process suggestion for minor issues
Elena Stepanova <elenst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:23:31 +0400
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
On 6/14/2013 2:27 PM, Rasmus Johansson wrote:
Hi MariaDB Developers,
This is a suggestion on how to deal with minor or lower priority bugs
and tasks in JIRA, http://mariadb.org/jira .
Currently, the process we use makes a clear differentiation between
major or higher prioirty issues (called majors altogether after this)
and minor or lower priority issues (called minors altogether after
this). The majors are the ones that should be fixed for a release and
the minors are rolling, meaning that they are done when the
corresponding developer has finished his/her majors. This of course
sounds logical, but it also leads to a growing number of minors for
every consecutive release, many of them which never will be fixed but
in the current process will hang around.
Here is a suggested process to handle the ever growing amount of
minors. If a minor issue isn't fixed after two consecutive releases
it's re-reviewed and either priority changed to major (or higher), or
the minor issue is closed with resolution Won't Fix and a comment.
Example of comment can be that "this is an edge case where effort and
benefits doesn't correlate".
I don't think the algorithm is quite fair. It means that if a really
minor bug happens to be found during a relatively slow period, it gets
fixed, but another bug, even considerably more important (but still
falling into "not major => minor" category), can be by this time closed
as "not worth fixing" just because people had been busy with some other
stuff and couldn't fix it over two previous releases; while logically,
if somebody suddenly has time to fix a minor bug, the latter should be
I'm fine with closing bugs as "Won't Fix", but imho it should be based
on the merits of the bug itself, not on the bad timing of its creation.
Since all our developers are very senior and can totally make such a
decision on their own, I suppose anyone who a bug is assigned to can
take a look at it and either close it as "Won't fix" with a proper
explanation, regardless the timing (even right after receiving it), or
keep it open. If someone isn't sure, he can always seek for colleague's
advice. If somebody disagrees with closing a bug, she can always scream.
It should also be noted that after
closing an issue in JIRA, it doesn't mean that it disappears. It will
still show up in free text searches and among the issues for the
version where it was closed.
Please provide your thoughts. Do you think it's an OK way to deal with
the minors or do you prefer some other way?
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
Post to : maria-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp