[rfc] bug handling priorities

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Ben Finney writes:
 > Martin Pool <mbp at canonical.com> writes:
 > 
 > >  * https://answers.launchpad.net/bzr - I like this compared to list
 > > posts because it makes it clear what's resolved or not

If you had a separate -users list, you could have a convention that
would be used by the answers team, like

    Subject: [Answered] How do I do XYZ with Bazaar?

Not recommending this over the web-based method (although personally I
do prefer mail to web channels).

BTW: It's not obvious at a glance what the difference between
"answered" and "solved" is.  You also ought to get rid of the
"invalid" category -- you might as well name it "stupid"!  The only
thing that should be invalid is spam and/or misdirected questions.
Alternatively rename to "misdirected" (which in the case of spam is
euphemism out the wazoo, but oh well).

 > On the other hand, it seems suitable only if you want to restrict
 > discussion to those who have a site-specific account.

C'mon, Ben, you know that is a technical restriction that is supposed
to be relaxed within a few months at the latest.

Also, looking at the list of questions on the page, I'm just as glad
most of that traffic is not on the list where development discussion
occurs.  The FAQ-ish flavor of many questions is very strong.  They
don't really need open discussion.