Subject: Counting bugs...
From: Jesper Skov (jskov@redhat.com)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 15:44:39 CST
I've made some changes to the queries I run so open bugs with severity
'enhancement' are not included in the stats (hence today's reduction).
I think we should consider some scheme to mark open bugs in a way so
it's clear that they will be dealt with later. Like the mozilla team
put a keyword in each bug telling when it's scheduled to be
fixed.
This is what triaging is all about. Some bugs are simply not possible
to fix for a given release because they rely on some non-trivial
rewrite of parts of the code. Those should be marked in a way so they
don't mess up the statistics.
Anybody like the idea of adding [v0.9], [v1.0], [v1.1], etc to the
title of bugs? Alternatively, update BugZilla to a newer
version. What's the chance of that being possible?
Jesper
-------------
Submitted bugs goal is zero: all bugs should be properly triaged,
possibly change priority, severity, component, and platform.
Open bugs goal is <50, less if possible: there should be no bugs
(duh!). IMO we can get away with shipping 1.0 with known bugs, as
long as there are no crashers among those, and the figure is brought
down to below 50 or so (and those bugs should be properly understood
and classified as nothing but annoyances.)
Bugs that are really feature requests should have changed severity to
enhancements so they do not appear in the statistics.
QA bugs goal is zero:
We should follow up on all fixed problems. This one should be the
least effort. It's a crying shame there are so many QA bugs.
Date: Submitted: Open: QA:
----------------------------------------------------------
2001.02.11 62 180 105
2001.02.12 65 ( +4%) 168 ( -6%) 106 ( +0%)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Feb 12 2001 - 15:44:47 CST