From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Evan Prodromou Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: More Bug Stuff Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:52:45 -0600 Organization: GLUG (Guile Lovers Use Guile) http://www.glug.org/ Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <871ye4y6qq.fsf@tyrell.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us> References: <873cypn2a2.fsf@tyrell.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us> <87d6xtzhzv.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1017334643 13169 127.0.0.1 (28 Mar 2002 16:57:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 16:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16qdDG-0003QI-00 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 17:57:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16qdD1-0000Ye-00; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:57:07 -0500 Original-Received: from 02-109.070.popsite.net ([66.19.142.109] helo=tyrell) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16qdAX-0000Tp-00 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:54:34 -0500 Original-Received: from evan by tyrell with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16qd8p-0001xC-00; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:52:47 -0600 Original-To: Marius Vollmer X-PGP-Fingerprint: 1366 538C 1E7D 0093 C45B 1A50 A33C 1E7C 700A 0551 X-Revolutionary-Date: Octidi, 8 Germinal 210 4:44:73 -29167 In-Reply-To: <87d6xtzhzv.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (Marius Vollmer's message of "25 Mar 2002 00:03:00 +0100") Original-Lines: 78 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090005 (Oort Gnus v0.05) Emacs/21.1 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:222 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:222 >>>>> "MV" == Marius Vollmer writes: MV> Do we need a number? I'd rather go with a symbolic name. MV> Numbers are so, umm, 'C'. It's much easier to auto-generate a unique number than a meaningful unique symbolic name. MV> Why "Title"? I prefer "Summary" for this. Why worry about header names? "Summary" is fine. Me> Name and email address of person who reported the bug, in Me> angle-bracket format. MV> Do we need to restrict us to the angle bracket format? What MV> about allowing any RFC2822 mailbox? It makes writing parsers easier. Do you really need the flexibility of using ANY kind of address header? >> All dates must either be in the above "standard" format, or in >> the format: >> >> dd Mon YYYY MV> I'd rather use the ISO format YYYY-MM-DD here. Do we need a MV> time? Fine. No, I don't think we particularly need a time. >> * Priority (0,Inf) MV> Again, do we need hard numbers for this? In general, I think MV> it will be mostly arbitrary what priority number is assigned MV> to a bug. It makes it much easier to say things like this: "For the next beta, we will fix all priority 1 bugs and as many 2 and 3 bugs as we can." It makes it easier to mentally categorize that 1 bugs are more important than 8 bugs. Also, it makes it clear that Priority and Severity are two different things. I'm a little confused why you say that priority assignment is "mostly arbitrary". First off, you've set yourself up as the arbitrator, so that's about right. But I think it's a generally common practice to prioritize jobs to do with a number between 1 and N, where N is a small integer. It's entirely subjective -- based on the project's goals, not on any algorithmically derivable formula. MV> Identifying critical bugs, and distinguishing bugs MV> from wishlist items is important, tho. We can use Severity MV> for this. Hurgh. I knew this would come up. Did you read what I wrote about Severity vs. Priority? Me> NOTE that Priority and Severity are loosely coupled -- things Me> that are more severe usually will have a high priority, but not Me> necessarily. For example, updating the version string for a Me> release is a high priority task, but it's not particularly Me> severe (it'd be a nuisance). MV> Are we talking about tasks here as well, in addition to bugs? MV> For tasks, priority makes more sense. Sorry, I mistakenly used the word "task" here, which seems to have confused you. What I should have said was "piece of work." If a release went out with the FSF address misspelled, this would be a low _severity_ bug, but a high _priority_ one. Anyways, OK, the rest looks good. ~ESP -- Evan Prodromou evan@glug.org _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel