Thanks for explaining this once again :-)
We are in agreement with the bug prioritization process outlined by you.
As explained in our hallway conversation, our intention in using the
keyword was to simply get a head start with a quick initial list of P3
bugs that get worked on before the rest of the P3s.
We will work towards coming up with a bug prioritization process that
will be based on your feedback and others in the community.
We will also need to ensure that this process works for GlassFish
open-source community.
This will be published and sent out as soon as possible.
Thanks,
-Dhiru & Sridatta
Bill Shannon wrote:
> Wrong, wrong, wrong.
>
> I see it's time for me to yet again explain how we are supposed to use
> bug priorities. Haven't I done this at least every release for the
> past, oh, I don't know, 8 years?
>
> A bug doesn't have an inherent priority. A bug isn't born with a
> priority.
> The priority of a bug is *our* decision. Not just a technical decision.
> Not just based on the impact of the bug. Not just based on the
> severity of
> the bug. But also based on resource, business decisions, and so on.
>
> The priority of a bug is the *output* of our decision making process;
> it reflects what we *decided*, not what a bug *is*.
>
> If we think a bug absolutely, positively, *MUST* be fixed before FCS,
> and if that one single bug is not fixed before FCS we will absolutely
> hold up the release until that single bug is fixed, then we mark it as
> a P3. Similarly for beta, we mark it as a P2. You can probably guess
> how important a P1 bug is.
>
> If we just *want* to fix the bug for FCS, that's a P4 bug.
>
> If you have a P4 bug, and you want to fix it for FCS, but you don't want
> to lose track of it, fill in the "target release" field with the name of
> the release where you intend to fix it.
>
> And if there are P4 bugs that you're not expecting to get to anytime
> soon, well, that's why we have P5.
>
> Do not add keywords to the bugs.
>
> This is the way we manage 900 bugs. We divide them into categories that
> are manageable. The bugs that deserve the bulk of our attention are
> those that we absolutely have to fix no matter what. If there aren't
> many less than 900 of those bugs, we're in deep trouble.
>
> Remember that when you submit a bug. Remember that when you assign a
> bug. Remember that when you evaluate a bug. If we aren't constantly
> verifying that bug priorities are correct, we'll end up with an
> unmanageable mess of thousands of bugs.
>
>
> Oh, and those bug queries, they're not including all the components
> that feed into GlassFish. We need to count them as well.
>
>
>
> Dhiru Pandey wrote:
>> Hello GlassFish Developers,
>>
>> We are almost done with GlassFish V2/9.1 Beta. Thanks again to all of
>> you for making this possible.
>>
>> Now its time to focus on FCS for this release - in particular fixing
>> P3 bugs required for FCS.
>>
>> We have too many P3 bugs currently:
>>
>> P3 bugs on *Issue Tracker* (436 currently)
>> <https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/buglist.cgi?Submit+query=Submit+query&issue_type=DEFECT&component=glassfish&issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&priority=P3&email1=&emailtype1=exact&emailassigned_to1=1&email2=&emailtype2=exact&emailreporter2=1&issueidtype=include&issue_id=&changedin=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&short_desc=&short_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&long_desc_type=substring&issue_file_loc=&issue_file_loc_type=substring&status_whiteboard=&status_whiteboard_type=substring&field0-0-0=reporter&type0-0-0=notequals&value0-0-0=gfbugbridge&field1-0-0=status_whiteboard&type1-0-0=notequals&value1-0-0=as91-na&field2-0-0=subcomponent&type2-0-0=notequals&value2-0-0=sqe-test&cmdtype=doit&namedcmd=All+JDBC%2FJMS%2FJCA+bugs&newqueryname=&or
>> der=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time>
>> P3 bugs on *Bugster* (468 currently)
>> <http://monaco.sfbay/list.jsf?product=sunone_application_server&hook4Opt=2&hook5Opt=2&area=Defect&CRrelease=null%2C9*&hook5=82to91-fp-na&hook4=as91-na%2Cas91-fixed%2Cas91-beta-waived&hook3=sjsmq-issues&title=Open+Bugs+with+Target+Release+9*%2C+null&hook2=as9-na&subcategory=bugbridge_test,docs,proxy_plugin,sample_apps,test_sqe&priority=3&sbOpt=2¬Subcategory=on&sb=glassfish-bugbridge%40sun.com&lh=1&hook2Opt=2&hook3Opt=2&fields=7.-.-.7,4.a.l.20&fieldids=59,7,36,4,51,54,1,76,90>
>>
>>
>> We need to do a triage on these bugs and decide which of these bugs
>> must be fixed for FCS. Currently, there may be bugs that are
>> classified as P3 bugs which may not be required for this release or
>> may be some corner case that has been misclassified as a P3, etc. We
>> need to separate these bugs out.
>>
>> In working towards that goal, please evaluate your P3 bugs and mark
>> all those bugs that *absolutely need to be fixed by FCS* by doing the
>> following:
>>
>> *On Issue Tracker* - Please add the keyword *as91-fcs* in the Status
>> whiteboard field for all such P3 bugs
>> *On Bugster* - Please add the keyword *as91-fcs* in Hook6 field for
>> all such P3 bugs. Please ensure that all P3 bugs that are S1
>> (severity 1) are marked by adding this keyword to Hook6 field
>>
>> Please work towards getting this done by *COB 2/16/2007*
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Dhiru & Sridatta
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>