[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] triage meeting

[Daniel Narvaez]

On 10 April 2014 21:18, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:27:09PM +0100, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> > What I'm saying is that the "would be nice" to fix will never be
> > fixed, they will keep accumulating and we will waste triage time on
> > them over and over.  Better to just wontfix them, people can always
> > send patches if they care. Plus we tell them clearly it's up to them
> > to do something if they need them fixed.
>
> I agree, if there's nobody going to work on a ticket, then close it
> wontfix.  The bug tracking system is useful as a list of non-features.
>

Not what I said. And not even funny.


> Also, it is common in triage to not process already triaged "would be
> nice" tickets, so you shouldn't be wasting triage time on them over
> and over.  If you are, fix your triage process.
>

And how do you avoid the issues getting obsolete (no more relevant, already
fixed etc) if not by re-triaging them? That approach has been certainly
common in sugar triage until recently. The result was that we couldn't
really point any new contributor to the bug tracker because most of the
bugs was obsolete.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20140410/a20130b0/attachment.html>