Enhancements as opposed to bugs
daniel.dandrada at canonical.com
Thu Oct 17 13:01:58 UTC 2013
I agree. Cryptic acronyms are bad.
Another ides is using tags, like suggested here
https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/176431/comments/4. That would
save us some precious space in the bug title.
On 16/10/13 23:03, Daniel van Vugt wrote:
> I don't think "[ER]" is very user-friendly. No one outside the team
> would understand it.
> How about "[feature]" or "[enhancement]"?
> On 16/10/13 21:02, Kevin Gunn wrote:
>> thanks for the feedback.
>> it likely won't be something to be fixed in a short term - but i agree,
>> bugs (over blueprints) seem closer to being 'everything' you'd want when
>> looking at the vices & virtues of bugs vs blueprints.
>> i think what bugs are missing is a bit of aggregation & reporting ...as
>> well as a way to better reflect scheduling (for a big picture view)
>> in the near term - there is certainly nothing wrong with pre-pending to
>> the bug title...i would suggest "[ER]" for 'enhancement request'...
>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>> <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>>
>> 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 Launchpad).
>> On 16/10/13 09:28, Daniel van Vugt wrote:
>> I think we all agree Launchpad does not represent
>> 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
>> 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
>> distinguishing between a bug and a feature would be nice
More information about the Mir-devel