On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Shaw Andy <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Before the transition to Qt being developed in the open via open governance, > the Qt Support team back in Trolltech and later Nokia, would prioritize the > bugs that were created, or at least handled, by them. Typically these would > be bugs that were brought to our attention by commercial customers using Qt. > As we know the bug fairly well at this point, and have an understanding of > the impact it has on applications, then we were in a position to set a > reasonable priority setting. Since the move to develop in the open via open > governance, this has not been kept up, as it was back then not desired that > the Qt Support team would continue this practice. > > What I would like to suggest that we do now is bring back this practice, so > that the Qt Support team will set a priority on the bugs that it creates or > handles, so that it makes things easier for the maintainers to actually see > what issues are potentially a higher priority than the others. And in the > case of the high priority issues, it will draw attention to them faster > rather than them being picked up later on in the process. I have also > discussed this with the developers inside Digia, and they see a need for > getting help when triaging the bugs, so having the Qt Support team set a > priority here would at least go some way to helping with that. Of course any > priority set by the Qt Support team is intended to be a guideline, the > maintainer would still be at liberty to change it if they disagree.
I assume you mean that any approver would still be at liberty to edit the priority if they disagree, basically that there's nothing special about the priority just because it was set by Qt Support. Then there's just the theoretical problem of non-approvers setting bug priorities, which is that most people think their bugs are top priority. I'm pretty sure the Qt Support team is sensible enough that they don't do that, so I think it would be helpful for them to be setting (initial) priorities. It would be nice to expand the concept to something more general, like a 'trusted triagers' status, but that can come as a later step. -- Alan Alpert _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
