On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Paul Houle paul@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.