Re: Bugzilla keywords [and bug day]

[Andrew Sobala <andrew sobala net>]

On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 02:44, John Fleck wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 19:26, Dave Fallon wrote:
> > 
> > Sniff... no more louie.
> > 
> > Anyways, some discussion on the post-louie bug era. In particular, it seems to be necessary 
> (and good) to have someone who goes "this is important for a release, and worth not punting", 
> and being able to enforce that. This requires two things: someone with a crapload of free time,
>  and the ability to (by hook or crook) get developers to fix bugs they otherwise wouldn't. Has 
> there been a decision on who this person will be yet? And if so, what can we do to help the
> second part of the requirements? The reason I think it's an issue is because all the breakup of
>  bugs we do between versions becomes pretty irrelevant if we just fix a random subset of bugs 
> each release. Louie's deep connections with the community (and employment at a company where he 
> can walk over and poke developers) has helped that a lot, and I fear whoever steps in his shoes
> will face some challenges getting to the same level of acceptance. Or am I totally off base?
> > 
> 
> It'll be hard to find people who are as good as Louie at being a total
> prick about this stuff. :-)
> 
> I would expect that without a full-time Louie-like person, it may well
> devolve to a team, with individuals responsible for each package. I'll
> analogize to the docs team, which has[1] one person assigned the herding
> responsibility for each package. In the bug-squad case, that person
> would work with the maintainer's blessing in trying to make those
> decisions, then help communicate uphill toward the release team about
> the status. Would it be reasonable post-Louie to formalize some sort of
> system along these lines?
> 

I think that's going to be one of the jobs that the module QA
maintainers are going to have.

-- 
Andrew