Yes! I agree. On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > Something else to consider is what to do with priorities. It might make > sense to set one when confirming bugs, it's hard to get right without > spending a lot of time really but maybe helpful for contributors even if not > very accurate. I think we have too many categories for priorities: IMHO, either it is a blocker or it is not. -walter > > > On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'godiard@sugarlabs.org')">godiard@sugarlabs.org</a>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, 9 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'godiard@sugarlabs.org')">godiard@sugarlabs.org</a>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This is an interesting blog post with a paragraph about GNOME triaging >>>>>> >>>>>> <a href="http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/enabling-participation/" target="_blank">http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/enabling-participation/</a> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interestingly it's pretty much exactly the same approach I followed >>>>>> with the triaging I had done with 0.100. It would be good to have a simple >>>>>> set of rule like that written down before the meeting. I think the way we >>>>>> triage has a huge impact on lowering contribution barriers, >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> We need at least verify all the "Unconfirmed" tickets. We can start >>>>> now, don't need wait until the triage meeting. >>>>> I assume, if the bug is confirmed, we should set: >>>>> Milestone = 0.102 >>>>> Status = New >>>> >>>> >>>> I wonder about Milestone. It seems like it would only be useful if we >>>> assign different milestones to tickets and I'm not sure we can do that >>>> without being able to allocate resources to fix them. It's also a time >>>> consuming task. >>> >>> >>> True. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> or close them if are not longer present. >>>>> >>>>> Would be good if we can reset all the priorities to "Unassigned", >>>>> in all the tickets with module=Sugar,the field content does not have >>>>> any sense right now. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do we want to use the field? Otherwise maybe there is a way to just get >>>> rid of it. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Just to mark they have been triaged, and based in the querys used in >>> <a href="http://bugs.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">bugs.sugarlabs.org</a> home. >>> Do you propose doing in another way? >> >> >> The home queries uses status == unconfirmed for untriaged. The tickets I >> set status = new (not that many left) have been confirmed. I had reset >> everything to unconfirmed before starting to triage. >> >> >> -- >> Daniel Narvaez >> > > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs <a href="http://www.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">http://www.sugarlabs.org</a> </blockquote> -- Daniel Narvaez