Blocking bugs process

[roger peppe]

[as roger.peppe at canonical.com this time]

On 14 July 2015 at 10:02, Nate Finch <nate.finch at canonical.com> wrote:
> I don't
> think it's unreasonable to just make such a bug a blocker, just to get it
> addressed ASAP, even if it is not strictly making things worse than an
> earlier version.

FWIW I think that this is overkill. When a bug is a blocker,
all other work grinds to a halt, and that is hugely significant in a large
project like this.

Surely there should be a better way of getting something fixed ASAP
than making almost everyone stop work? Every member of every team
cannot work on fixing the bug, and nor should they. We need
a way to ensure that the bug *is* being worked on and that progress
is being made but blocking everyone on the bug is just a recipe
for slowing down overall progress.

IMHO kind of bug is qualitatively different from bugs which prevent
CI tests passing - not fixing those means that CI is worthless.
Of course these bugs are important, but not *that* important.

  cheers,
    rog.