Re: [Nautilus-list] new Nautilus bugzilla categories

[Darin Adler <darin bentspoon com>]

On 1/21/02 9:55 AM, "Luis Villa" <louie ximian com> wrote:

> As far as the overall picture goes- does this schema work for you guys?

What we need most is some way to tag bugs as "must fix or we don't think
we're shippable for some particular milestone". My concern is that these
milestones will instead be used to tag "things I think should be fixed for a
particular milestone".

The actual names of the milestones don't worry me so much.

What I am worried about is getting a realistic set of items in the list so
that things don't fall through the cracks.

> Your feedback is appreciated (especially since gtk+ has ensured that the
> triage scheme is still an open question.)

In general, the most important thing for me is to be able to quickly find:

    1) bugs that must be fixed for the next release
    2) bugs that we called out earlier as "nice to do" for that release
    3) bugs that haven't been looked at yet

And do reports on them to see who these are assigned to.

I think that the downside of using Gnome 2 overall project milestones as
"milestones" is that it doesn't adapt well for projects that have separate
agendas. In particular, one of the strengths of Gnome is that a Gnome
release is a snapshot of a bunch of separate pieces, but those pieces don't
get tied to a single central schedule. Anyway, this is too "cosmic" a thing
for me to get very excited about.

The current problem for Nautilus is getting the set of bugs chosen to work
on; not what name we give the milestone that we use to mark this set of
bugs.

    -- Darin