Incomplete with no response >30 days

[Scott Kitterman]

On Sun, 25 May 2008 12:31:40 +0200 Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan at club.fr> wrote:
>Le dimanche 25 mai 2008 à 18:33 +1000, Sarah Hobbs a écrit :
><snip>
>> There seems to be an attitude of "screw the developers, we are the 
>> mighty bug squad, and can do what we like" here.
>The contrary can be true as well, but that's absolutely not the point
>here. ;-)
>
>> But really, isn't the job of the bug squad to get bugs into a good state 
>> of triage, so they can be dealt with by the developers?  Does it not 
>> make sense, therefore, to listen to what the developers want the bug 
>> squad to do to the bugs, in a general sense, and then for the bug squad 
>> to go away and deal with the specifics?
>> 
>> I don't think the bug squad should have the right to say "we will make 
>> the rules, everyone else must follow them", as, while there are many bug 
>> squad people (yes, developers are still bug squad too), the bug squad 
>> does not put real bugs (ie, not invalid, etc) in a final state, so 
>> someone always has to come after them, and touch the bugs afterwards. 
>> This is not the case for developers.
>I don't see the need here to oppose bug triager and developers here - yes, developers are members of the bug squad too, and the only aim of all these groups is to make Ubuntu work right. For this we need rule the best cooperation between all classes of contributors. And bug triagers are a really diverse group, from which you cannot expect to master every Ubuntu trick.
>
>The bug squad is not here to serve developers, but precisely to get
>needed information so that bugs are made useful to them. Developers also
>should make the life of bug triagers easier since their own work depends
>on the bug squad efficiency.
>
>As Henrik Nilsen Omma summed it up [1], there's just a need to find
>better conventions in order to make special bugs (sync requests...)
>conform to the general convention. No need to hurt anyone here:
>developers could simply use "Confirmed" instead of "Incomplete" when
>waiting for more information that *they will get by themselves*, and not
>from any user; "Triaged" and "In progress" are still here for more
>advanced states. And surely assigning bugs when somebody is taking care
>of a bug, even if no work is going on would help, since other developers
>that may want to work on the bug will know what kind of "special tricks"
>are involved.
>
>Hope we can find a common rule
>
>

At UDS we had a couple of good sessions around this topic.  I accepted an action, as one of the people primarily focused on development present, to summarize the proposal to the development community.  I don't think that was meant to imply that people focused on triaging should be left out, just that it wasn't my task to communicate it to them (on a related note, if someone reading this on -devel-discuss could let this onto the bugsquad list, please do as I'm not subscribed).

Rather than develop more alternate solutions, I'd suggest patience at rhis point.  It will likely take a little bit for me get this written up as the proposal has some complexity to it and I need to write out enough background to make it clear what problems we are trying to solve with the proposed change for those who have not been involved in the discussion thus far.

Scott K