ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive
-
ubuntu-bugcontrol team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #04143
Re: Why not triaging confirmed bugs instead of new ones?
Omer Akram:
One thing we need to know is that not everyone is willing to report each
and every bug they see.
MIXED TWO DIFFERENT TOPICS
I think I have mixed two different topics:
1. Confirming bugs to belong to the tester role, and not to the
triager one.
2. Confirming bugs by reading reports one by one to add little value
and much more hard work compared to just testing the software by hand,
reporting found bugs and see if Launchpad says someone reported the
error before you.
BETTER MOVING THROUGH A LINE THAN AN SPAGHETTI
What I see is this:
- Mixing confirming and triaging overly complicates bug management,
since you'll be forced to test most new bugs in their specific release.
So you will have to be constantly loading virtual disk images or, most
probable, just omitting triaging bugs; accumulating them on a pile.
- So, if you want to confirm bugs, it will be better to load one virtual
disk image and test it; instead of changing from one image to other
while performing a complex process as triaging is at the same time.
- While people can dislike reporting bugs, they usually confirm relevant
ones.
- The main reason why people dislike reporting bugs is because they
think no one will look at them most of the time, and the real reason for
no one looking at them is people confirming reports one by one instead
of testing the software by hand and telling Launchpad what they found.
- Each Ubuntu release is published with many relevant confirmed bugs
being unfixed, because triagers are spending their time in bugs that can
be important, but not in bugs that are already known to be.
- What we will want, specially having this amount of reports, is to make
the most of our triaging time: to make the work that will impact the
quality of Ubuntu the most, instead of being looking through noise most
of the time.
- Paying the prize of omitting a few important bugs is worth having the
most disruptive ones triaged fast, months in advance the final release
is hit, so developers have time to fix them in advance out of Stable
Release Updates.
PRODUCTIVITY IS DISTINGUISHING IMPORTANT FROM THE MOST IMPORTANT
In fact this is what several philosophies suggest as the most important
thing: to forget about details, although they can be somehow important,
in order to deal with the most important first:
- Unix Philosophy: "This is the Unix philosophy: Write programs that
do one thing and do it well".
- Unix Rule of Robustness: "Robustness is the child of simplicity.
Developers should design robust programs by designing for transparency
and discoverability, because code that is easy to understand is easier
to stress test for unexpected conditions that may not be foreseeable in
complex programs".
- Richard P. Gabriel: "Worse is better: simplicity of both the
interface and the implementation are more important than any other
attributes of the system—including correctness, consistency, and
completeness".
- Pareto Rule: "The 80% of value is brought by the 20% of work".
- Goethe: "Important things should never be at the mercy of less
important ones".
- Brian Tracy: "There isn't enough time to do everything, but there's
always enough time to do the most important things".
- Brian Tracy: "You should never deal with important things while you
have a big frog staring in front of you".
- Taiichi Ohno: “All we are doing is looking at the time line, from
the moment the customer gives us an order to the point when we collect
the cash. And we are reducing the time line by reducing the non-value
adding wastes”.
- Taiichi Ohno: “The only place that work and motion are the same thing
is the zoo where people pay to see the animals move around”.
- Taiichi Ohno: “Why not make the work easier and more interesting so
that people do not have to sweat? The Toyota style is not to create
results by working hard. It is a system that says there is no limit to
people’s creativity. People don’t go to Toyota to ‘work’ they go there
to ‘think’”.
- Eliyahu M. Goldratt: “An hour saved at the non-bottleneck is a mirage”.
- Eliyahu M. Goldratt: “I say an hour lost at a bottleneck is an hour
out of the entire system. I say an hour saved at a non-bottleneck is
worthless. Bottlenecks govern both throughput and inventory”.
- KISS Rule: "Keep It Simple Stupid" (if it is complex it is not smart,
no matter what is thought).
I HAVE SEEN SORCERY
So do you feel like fighting giants when triaging?
Because I have seen to cut down a process from 40 minutes to 1 second,
building 15 trucks in the time of 1, and reducing a list of 300.000 work
items to three lists of 8.
And the used method always has been this: forget about the 80% of work
and use it to deal with many 20%s as possible.
Regards.
References