Incomplete with no response >30 days

[Sarah Hobbs]

HggdH wrote:

 > No. It does not. It does make sense for *BOTH* developers and
 > bug-squadders to discuss and reach a consensus. We do not impose
 > on YOU how to develop, you should not impose on us how to triage.

Telling you how to triage?  No.  Finding a way of saying "you do not 
need to waste your time on these bugs, because these have special 
procedures and different definitions of things, and feel free to focus 
on other bugs" - I guess you could interpret that as telling you how to 
triage, at a stretch.

On the other hand, isn't it better for you guys that way, so you end up 
with a higher final count of bugs that are looked at in a given time 
period?  Doesn't that make the bug squad more effective?


> It is a pity that this discussion escalated so fast to the makings of a
> flame war.

I would hope that could be avoided.

As a general note, I was not putting words into your mouth - I was 
commenting more on what some of the general perceptions seem to be, from 
within the bug squad.

Unfortunately, the last 'consensus' I saw was a wiki revert (which, I 
now see has been added back, with a great section of 'draft' around it), 
and when attempting to discuss the ways forward with some high members 
of the bug squad, some MOTUs effectively got responses of "we don't 
approve of using the bug tracker for workflow bugs, as they're not real 
bugs, so you guys have to figure out a way of making it work the way you 
guys want it to, without us changing, because there are more triagers 
than developers, so it's more feasible for you guys to change your 
workflow than us".

I would hope that a mailing list is more effective than the irc-based 
discussions were.  It being on both mailing lists, so both groups of 
people see it, should help with that.

Needless to say, I'll hearby assume that the above comments some of the 
developers got from the bug squad are *not* the norm - and from these 
mails, it would appear that there is a reasonable chance of mediation, 
rather than the earlier vibes coming from certain members of the bug 
squad team.

Hobbsee

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20080526/f587c117/attachment.sig>