Re: To Understand and Improve GNOME Bug Workflow

Andre, many thanks for the comments and stories, very helpful.
Yes, the term "service quality" means time to respond to / fix an issue.
We are considering to describe it in a more proper and straightforward way :)


2015-11-14 0:43 GMT+08:00 Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net>:
On Sat, 2015-11-14 at 00:20 +0800, shin zhu wrote:
> We designed a tool which visualizes historical issue tracking
> (Bugzilla) data
> to support analysis of issue status workflow, such as identification of different
> workflows in the past and evaluation of their effectiveness.
> For more information about the tool, please visit
> To download and install the tool, please refer to
> A quick start guide is attached in this email,
> and here is an online demo video:
> We invite you to have a look at the tool, have a try and give your comments or
> reviews to help us to evaluate and improve it.
> For example, consider the following questions:
> does it make it easier to look at the historical issue workflow?
> do you discover something that you have not been aware of before?
> do you come up with some ideas about the issue maintenance or other effort
> related to issues.

The video is interesting, thank you for sharing it!

The workflow change in 2007 to bypass NEEDINFO was discussed here:
...and it's good to see that it really saved triagers some time.

The large number of incoming bug reports in late 2006 was also covered
here with a potential explanation:

Bug-Buddy got deprecated in the late GNOME 2.x days as automated crash
reporting became more and more a distribution-level thing.

I was not always entirely sure what the term "service quality" meant.
It seems to be used like "time to respond"?

Andre Klapper  |  ak-47 gmx net

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]