Derek Parnell Wrote: > On Tue, 12 May 2009 10:13:38 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > > > The order of importance of bugs is roughly: > > > > 1. silently generating bad code > > 2. compiler crashes > > 3. regressions that break previously working code > > 4. not accepting valid code > > 5. accepting invalid code > > 6. poor error messages > > > > Throw into that how much work a bug is to fix, how many projects it > > affects, if there's a patch submitted, etc. > > This is useful and important information. IMO it should be on your website > ASAP. > > I think you have forgotten another criteria that should be on this list, > the age of a bug report. Although a bug, which doesn't fall into the top > priorities here, is old it does not mean that it shouldn't be looked at. > From a product perspective you are correct - it is of low importance, but > from a client perspective, submitting a bug report which is effectively > placed in limbo is a let down - it can cause people to no longer want to > help you. > > A trickle of older bugs being fixed would do wonders for client > relationship management - especially those with higher votes. > > -- > Derek Parnell > Melbourne, Australia > skype: derek.j.parnell
A few other metrics that effect user perception 1. Has the assignee ever commented on the bug? 2. When will the bug be fixed? Has a milestone been assigned?