"Wikitravel has a speed and convenience the books' publishers can only envy." Time Europe

Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Open bug reports"

From Wikitravel Shared
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
:::OK, I've now gone through all the bugs. I left all bug reports that I think should eventually be attended to in the Openbug category, even though some of them are of very low priority. I think we can leave the prioritization to [[Top bugs]], where we already draw attention to the bugs that are really causing significant, even damaging, problems. The backburnerbugs, on the other hand, are all reports that I thought we should table, and not work on, unless someone makes an argument as to why we should do so. There may still be some openbugs that should be put on the backburner, but I confess there were a few that I left as open simply because I didn't understand them.  --[[User:Peterfitzgerald|Peter]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Peterfitzgerald|Talk]]</sup></small> 03:11, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
 
:::OK, I've now gone through all the bugs. I left all bug reports that I think should eventually be attended to in the Openbug category, even though some of them are of very low priority. I think we can leave the prioritization to [[Top bugs]], where we already draw attention to the bugs that are really causing significant, even damaging, problems. The backburnerbugs, on the other hand, are all reports that I thought we should table, and not work on, unless someone makes an argument as to why we should do so. There may still be some openbugs that should be put on the backburner, but I confess there were a few that I left as open simply because I didn't understand them.  --[[User:Peterfitzgerald|Peter]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Peterfitzgerald|Talk]]</sup></small> 03:11, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::Thank you, Peter. That's a great help! So much cleaner and easier to get around. I hope that others who feel like they can help prioritize bugs will jump in, too. [[User:JuCo|JuCo]] 14:31, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 18:35, 21 March 2008

Clarifying Priorities[edit]

The "Top bugs" category works really well for determining the "most pressing" bugs. And in theory, the "Roadmap" should be where Feature requests bump up, right? Not sure how much that's being used. But part of the challenge is that when we go into the Open Bug Reports it's a bit overwhelming. I've gone through and looked at each report, and determined which seem current/pressing. My criteria were currency (how recently the bug was reported) and length/size of discussion. (Notice I haven't moved or marked anything on the site, just did my own investigation.) What I would really like to do is weed out this list a little, perhaps create a "back burner" page with older and more minor bugs. Please let me know your feedback. We'd only do something like this with the understanding that if we got something wrong or misjudged something, we'd move it right back onto the current list. Please take a moment to look over some of these bug reports, and you may see what I mean. As always, looking forward to your thoughts.JuCo 14:33, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

There are some old, minor bugs worth keeping on the todo list, I think, but there are a bunch of tech requests which are borderline closable—a separate "backburner" category sounds like a useful idea. We should do the same for feature requests—there is a big gulf between a relatively small number of features that really should be implemented, and a larger number of "it would be nice if" features, that are not so essential. --Peter Talk 00:28, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
I've plunged a bit on this. My take on how best to determine what gets set on the backburner has been to subjectively move them there myself, and if anyone is willing to speak up on behalf of a report that got put on the backburner, then they are free to move it back into the open bugs category. --Peter Talk 00:54, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
OK, I've now gone through all the bugs. I left all bug reports that I think should eventually be attended to in the Openbug category, even though some of them are of very low priority. I think we can leave the prioritization to Top bugs, where we already draw attention to the bugs that are really causing significant, even damaging, problems. The backburnerbugs, on the other hand, are all reports that I thought we should table, and not work on, unless someone makes an argument as to why we should do so. There may still be some openbugs that should be put on the backburner, but I confess there were a few that I left as open simply because I didn't understand them. --Peter Talk 03:11, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
Thank you, Peter. That's a great help! So much cleaner and easier to get around. I hope that others who feel like they can help prioritize bugs will jump in, too. JuCo 14:31, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

In other languages