Difference between revisions of "Talk:BugSquad/Bug Triage"
(New page: Certainly areas of potential improvement is in regard to defining appropriate tags for Milestones and Components, and coming up with a list of keywords that we can agree to the meaning of....) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Questions== | ==Questions== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Milestones/Versions=== | ||
Would it make sense to have a Sugar '''milestone''' (e.g., Sugar 0.82) that is distinct from the OLPC milestones? Or would it make more sense to have a Sugar '''version''' that maps to an OLPC milestone? | Would it make sense to have a Sugar '''milestone''' (e.g., Sugar 0.82) that is distinct from the OLPC milestones? Or would it make more sense to have a Sugar '''version''' that maps to an OLPC milestone? | ||
| + | ===Keywords/Components=== | ||
Would it make sense to consistently add '''keywords''' that map to the Sugar modules or should these be '''components'''? | Would it make sense to consistently add '''keywords''' that map to the Sugar modules or should these be '''components'''? | ||
* sugar | * sugar | ||
| Line 16: | Line 19: | ||
** ''et alia'' | ** ''et alia'' | ||
| + | ===Priorities=== | ||
The assignment of '''priorities''' is the difficult one. We need to come up with definitions and a process. A first pass: | The assignment of '''priorities''' is the difficult one. We need to come up with definitions and a process. A first pass: | ||
| Line 26: | Line 30: | ||
:Low: odds and ends | :Low: odds and ends | ||
| + | ===Verify=== | ||
Would it be possible to assign teams to each ticket, where we identify up front someone who agrees to '''verify''' a ticket, and someone who agrees to test a fix? Maybe we can accumulate a list of volunteers who'd be willing to be assigned in a work-wheel-like system? | Would it be possible to assign teams to each ticket, where we identify up front someone who agrees to '''verify''' a ticket, and someone who agrees to test a fix? Maybe we can accumulate a list of volunteers who'd be willing to be assigned in a work-wheel-like system? | ||
Revision as of 17:00, 13 May 2008
Certainly areas of potential improvement is in regard to defining appropriate tags for Milestones and Components, and coming up with a list of keywords that we can agree to the meaning of.
Questions
Milestones/Versions
Would it make sense to have a Sugar milestone (e.g., Sugar 0.82) that is distinct from the OLPC milestones? Or would it make more sense to have a Sugar version that maps to an OLPC milestone?
Keywords/Components
Would it make sense to consistently add keywords that map to the Sugar modules or should these be components?
- sugar
- sugar-base
- sugar-datastore
- sugar-presence-service
- sugar-toolkit
- sugar-artwork
- sugar-activity
- journal-activity
- chat-activity
- et alia
Priorities
The assignment of priorities is the difficult one. We need to come up with definitions and a process. A first pass:
- Blocker: catastrophic failure—Sugar will not run or user experience severely impaired (new features would rarely, if ever, fall into this category)
- High: important to Sugar user experience—either in terms of performance or usability (these would typically be coupled with the "task" ticket type)
- Med: enhancements to non-core features (or enhancements that impact individual activities)
- Low: odds and ends
Verify
Would it be possible to assign teams to each ticket, where we identify up front someone who agrees to verify a ticket, and someone who agrees to test a fix? Maybe we can accumulate a list of volunteers who'd be willing to be assigned in a work-wheel-like system?