Unity 7 & Compiz bug triage

[Brian Murray]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:23:22PM +0100, Will Cooke wrote:
> On 18 August 2015 at 18:46, Will Cooke <will.cooke at canonical.com> wrote:
> 
> > Yeah, I think targeting NEW bugs is a better approach.  Perhaps when all
> > of those are dealt with we could move on to the others, starting with
> > Confirmed.  Certainly where some work has already been done it would be
> > silly to throw that away unnecessarily.
> >
> >
> 
> Having just spent a couple more minutes poking around in LP I'm starting to
> think that I would class bugs which are "confirmed" by LP janitor because
> they affect multiple people AND have a low heat as NEW in the above
> scenario.

Yes, although keep in mind that the apport-retracer automatically
duplicates bug reports which would make the status "Confirmed" so it'd
be worthwhile to separate those out. Here's an example.

http://launchpad.net/bugs/1438210

--
Brian Murray
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20150818/ea3320f6/attachment.pgp>