Enhancements as opposed to bugs
Daniel van Vugt
daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com
Wed Oct 16 02:10:10 UTC 2013
Though I recall some of the proprietary issue tracking systems I've used
in the past clearly distinguished between Bug and Enhancement.
And that in itself was sometimes problematic. Where people can't decide
or agree if something is a bug or a feature, you either need a third
classification or a more neutral system that just doesn't care (like
On 16/10/13 09:28, Daniel van Vugt wrote:
> I think we all agree Launchpad does not represent enhancement/feature
> requests ideally. That's why I asked how we'd like to work around the
> Also, I just found the bug (which itself is actually a feature request)
> and it looks unlikely to be resolved:
> On 15/10/13 22:09, Michał Sawicz wrote:
>> On 15.10.2013 16:04, Daniel d'Andrada wrote:
>>> Bugs and new features are, on a slighly higher level, the same thing:
>>> work that has to be done on some piece of software, according to some
>>> specs, with a target milestone, an assignee, a given priority, a state
>>> (in progress, new, commited, released), a discussion around it, etc.
>>> At my previous job we had different systems for those (bugs and
>>> features) for a long time and it was awesome when we finally started
>>> using only one (the bug tracker, but tweaked a bit to better accommodate
>>> those two kinds of tasks) for everything. I think it's just natural to
>>> do so.
>> I believe the biggest problem with launchpad in that regard is that
>> "Wishlist" is the lowest priority (Importance) level. You can't make an
>> enhancement higher priority than a bug, that's why some clear
>> distinguishing between a bug and a feature would be nice indeed.
More information about the Mir-devel