[Sugar-devel] triage meeting

[Daniel Narvaez]

Yes, things we *want* to do are normal priority, my issue is with things
that would be nice to do :)

Terminology aside, I'm not saying it's bad, just expensive and IMO lower
priority then a lot of other awesome things we could do... But if there are
people interested in "keeping records", all the power to them!

On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard at sugarlabs.org> wrote:

> I disagree.
>
> While is true manage the tickets have cost, is good have a record of
> things we want to do,
> even when we don't have the resources today to do it. More in the context
> of a project
> where we have volunteers some times more, some times less.
>
> Just my two cents ...of pesos :)
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>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.
>
> IMO it's really really important to aggressively close stuff we are not
> realistically going to fix soon. Otherwise either we waste more time
> triaging than fixing or we don't triage enough and the bug tracker becomes
> useless.
>
> Just my two cents. We could also keep "low" for now and see if it really
> grows too much to be worth retriaging over time. In my experience it's
> always does but it would be nice to be proven wrong.
>
> On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>
> Well, maybe call iy "normal" or "low" instead of "minor", but we need a
> way
> to separate the tickets we _need_ fix, the tickets we _want_ fix,
> and the tickets _would_be_nice_ fix.
> We have almost 250 tickets, if we can solve 50 tickets in these 2 months,
> is important know what are the best candidates.
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> This is probably going to be a bit controversial, but I think if something
> is worth marking minor then it's probably not worth tracking. We will never
> get to fix the minor but we will waste time triaging and retriaging them.
>
>
> On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>
>  +1 to check if are enhancements or defects.
>
> About priorities, we can make something like:
>
> blocker: regressions, crashes, serious bugs
>
> major: bugs affecting the usability
>
> minor: other
>
> Just a idea to start to discuss.
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>
> 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 <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thursday, 10 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard at sugarlabs.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wednesday, 9 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard at sugarlabs.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com
> >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is an interesting blog post with a paragraph about GNOME
> triaging
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/enabling-participation/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Interestingly it's pretty much exactly the same approach I followed
> >>>>>> with the triaging I had done with 0.100.
>
> --
> Gonzalo Odiard
>
> SugarLabs - Software for children learning
>


-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20140410/78aca554/attachment.html>