ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive
-
ubuntu-bugcontrol team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #04136
Re: Why not triaging confirmed bugs instead of new ones?
On 2014-07-19 00:53, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> In the triage guide (http://tinyurl.com/kz4netu) there's a list for
> suggested bugs for being triaged, which basically is one of reports
> being untouched and not confirmed.
>
> Although confirming bugs could be taken into consideration, for triaging
> wouldn't it be better to suggest confirmed bugs instead?
Considering that a bug gets "confirmed" as soon as somebody besides the
bug reporter states that it affects him/her, I think that confirmed bugs
should always be included when looking for untouched bugs. Guess that
page ought to be edited.
> Also it seems to me that shorting bugs with higher heat rather than with
> higher importance could be a good idea for triaging,
If importance has been set, the bug has already been triaged, hasn't it?
But indeed the bug heat can serve as an importance indicator of
untriaged bug reports.
--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj
Follow ups
References