On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Paul Houle <paul(a)ontology2.com> wrote:
I don't see this as an entry-level job, but
it seems that
everybody in the biz only wants to hire entry-level people who'll work
70 hours a week for rice and beans and get thrown away when they start
asking for health insurance.
Bug triaging, like QA, is something where you really want a talented
person doing it, but where talented people usually don't want to do
it. It's boring and repetitive, and in the case of bug triaging you
have to deal with a lot of idiots and probably aren't allowed to yell
at them. So it's most likely an entry-level job -- someone with
experience probably will want to do actual programming or something.
On a somewhat random side note, I hope we won't encourage the
bugmeister to close bugs. Valid bugs or enhancement requests that no
one is likely to fix in the foreseeable future should be left open, as
long as we'd theoretically accept a patch if someone submitted one and
got it reviewed. Projects that close bugs as WONTFIX to mean "We
don't think this is important enough to fix", or that pester reporters
every few months to ask if the problem is still present in hope that
they won't respond and the bug can be closed as "No response from
reporter", annoy me intensely. Healthy projects have lots of open
bugs, there's nothing wrong with that.