On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 17:39 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote:
I propose adding a *new* priority called "Immediate" which should only be used to mark really urgent stuff to fix. This priority would be added above the existing "Highest" priority.
1) Look at the current distribution of priorities at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/report.cgi?y_axis_field=&cumulate=0&z... and see that "Normal" in the center is the clear peek.
Realistically, a way larger amount of reports should be low priority: Nobody working on it, and nothing will happen soon without sudden unlimited manpower.
2) Look at our priority definitions in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bugzilla/Fields#Priority
a) "normal" means "Should be fixed by the next release."[1] This is extremely unrealistic with above usage of "Normal".
b) There is no real difference between "would be good to get fixed somewhere in the future" (low) and "can be fixed, but we're not going to worry about it" (lowest). Hence no good reason to keep them separately. We need to be able to differentiate on *important* stuff instead.
So in a mysterious future not that far away, I'd like to merge "Normal" and "Low", or "Low" and "Lowest" priorities.
Combined with a new "Immediate" priority as proposed above (quoting myself), we would keep the same number of priorities, but we'd communicate way more realistic expectations on fixing issues by moving the peek from the center to the right, where "Low priority" lives.
andre
[1] "normal" priority meaning "Should be fixed by the next release" should be questioned too, but I'd prefer to NOT do it as part of this thread but do that later.
PS: Bonus material: Which priorities do other Bugzillas use?: KDE: {VHI, HI, NOR, LO, VLO} Mozilla: {P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, --} Mer: {High, Normal, Low, Undecided} GNOME: {Immediate, Urgent, High, Normal, Low} FreeDesktop.org: {Highest, High, Medium, Low, Lowest}
-- Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/