On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Mike Rooney <<a href="mailto:mrooney@gmail.com">mrooney@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="Ih2E3d">On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Ben Collins <<a href="mailto:ben.collins@canonical.com">ben.collins@canonical.com</a>> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 16:18 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> Ben Collins <<a href="mailto:ben.collins@canonical.com">ben.collins@canonical.com</a>> writes: >> >> > Take the intrepid linux-ports package that will be coming down the pipe. >> > The bugs will be split up on the basis of architecture. So assigning >> > bugs to the ubuntu-{powerpc,ia64,hppa,sparc} teams as a triage step >> > makes sense, and immediately shows responsibility. Then individuals in >> > those teams can take the bug. >> > >> > No one has yet explained a better way to handle this sort of workflow, >> >> Obvious way: don't assign, but subscribe the team that is going to >> handle the bug. >> >> The advantages: >>  - it does not give users the false impression someone would actually >>    work on that bug > </div>> I don't see how users get that impression. In-Progress is what is meant > to show that a bug is being worked on. Assignment just shows who is > ultimately responsible for the next stage of the workflow. Once it is > triaged, in the case I outlined, then a team is responsible for the next > step (not a single person). That next step is deciding whether it should > be fixed or not, and then having a person work on it. > This makes perfect sense to me. If a bug isn't "In Progress", I shouldn't assume it is in progress (ie being worked on actively by that team)! This way assigning to teams doesn't lose any information, and I do agree bugs should be assignable to teams.</blockquote><div> That depends on what you mean by "actively being worked on". I would consider triage and many other statuses besides "In Progress" as being "work".  The impression I get is that indeed people view assignment as "somebody's actively working on this". So if you assign a team that's not more likely to work on the bug than if they weren't assigned, I can see the false impression Reinhard talked about. For instance, assigning the MOTU team to all Universe bugs is pointless and in fact quite irritating and counterproductive. </div></div> -Jordan