On 03/18/2011 07:43 AM, Martin Nordholts wrote:

Hi,

I think we should discuss how we make best use of Bugzilla. Except for tracking bugs, I'd like us to use bugzilla for

a) Keeping track of what is important to fix for a given release b) Keeping track of what bugs among all our bugs we consider important to fix, but not more important than working on things on our roadmap

I'd like to use milestones [1] for a) , and priorities [2] for b). Does this sound reasonable to everyone? Would be good to agree on this before we start updating lots of bugs.

I'd like to use bugzilla milestones a) for "we want this bug fixed in that version, no matter if we get around to do it or not", so we should be generous with what is "important", because it's the *only* list of bugs we have in e.g. 2.6 or 2.8 (the reported-against version is random mostly noise anyway).

So it seems I mostly agree with your a), and I have no objections against using priorities for b).

Generally, I rather like to have more than less bugs on a milestone, because there is nothing more frustrating than a huge list of bugs with milestone "---". It looks as if we simply don't care at all.

ciao, --Mitch

On 03/18/2011 04:03 AM, Michael Natterer wrote:

Generally, I rather like to have more than less bugs on a milestone, because there is nothing more frustrating than a huge list of bugs with milestone "---". It looks as if we simply don't care at all.

For a bug reporter,it would be frustrating to have a bug accepted with milestone X only to have it then pushed out to X+2 or later. But I agree that for everyone else, the milestone indication helps acknowledging that the bug is recognized as real and there is an intend to fix.

Both as a developer and a user I like Bugzilla and the information it gives me; the more information it provides, the better. If there are many bugs with a 2.8 milestone, I would be more encouraged to try and help out by researching and addressing some of them.

Eric