Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [wtp-pmc] WTP bug backlog

Konstantin had a suggestion in the meeting to use the helpwanted keyword to flag bugs we normally would close.  This has the advantage of letting people we have no plans to fix, and asking the community for help.  I think this can be incorporated into the backlog strategy,

256 untargetted major and higher?  Yikes, that should be a top priority.  :-)

John Lanuti
IBM Web Tools Platform Technical Lead, IBM Rational
IBM Software Lab - Research Triangle Park, NC
t/l 441-7861

Neil Hauge <neil.hauge@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

07/16/2007 06:14 PM

Please respond to
neil.hauge@xxxxxxxxxx; Please respond to
"WTP PMC communications \(including coordination, announcements,        and Group discussions\)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>

"WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements,        and Group discussions)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
[wtp-pmc] WTP bug backlog


As was briefly discussed in the WTP status call last week, we have a
growing backlog of bugs (3000+) that we should deal with in some way.  
David asked me if I could take a look at this and suggest a course of
action.  Here are my thoughts on how we should proceed:

- Component leads should review all 256 untargeted severity Major and
higher bugs
- Component leads should review all 160 bugs with patches attached

That leaves around 2000 untargeted bugs and 500 untargeted
enhancements.  I think that component leads should also review the 500
untargeted enhancements, as this would be a good exercise for 3.0 planning.

After that I am less certain on what our policy should be.  The question
is what to do about the remaining 2000 untargeted, non-major bugs
(specifically the older ones).  Ideally these bugs would be tested
against WTP 2.0 to determine if they are still valid, but as you know
this is a very big job.  The question is whether we can off-load this
task onto the community by setting "old" bugs (> 1 year) to "Won't Fix"
and providing a comment that says to please re-open if this is still a
valid bug.  If we do this it is likely that some valid bugs may be lost
in the shuffle, and we might annoy some people who spent real time
entering good bugs.  I'm not sure if this is more desirable than having
a large bug backlog for some time to come, but it might be a necessary
evil.  I suppose that if internal review is not feasible, then doing
this will allow WTP development to focus on bugs that are still
important to the current community, which is indeed desirable.

I think we should discuss this issue further at the meeting tomorrow, or
as soon as time permits.

wtp-pmc mailing list

Back to the top