On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 08:13:43PM +1100, Jonathan Lange wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Bjorn Tillenius <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 10:02:11AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote: > ... > >> * auto-assign bugs in that component to a person/team for triage > > > > It depends on what you mean with "auto-assign". I don't think the bug > > should actually be assigned to someone, rather a team/person would be > > responsible for a component, and would easily see which bugs he needs to > > triage. > > > > People who advocate auto-assigning generally take the assignment to > model the responsibility that you just described.
Right, I would think so too. IMO, we shouldn't go that way. If we overload assignment, it leads to a bunch of other issues, such as figuring out how we can keep track of bugs that are assigned because of intention to fix the bug, and bugs that are assigned because of intention of triage the bugs. Although that said, we actually shouldn't talk that much about implementation issues. First we should focus on what we want to do, and that is to have a group of people responsible for triaging a group of bugs, and then decide whether we need to introduce a new data structure, or if we can re-use existing ones. -- Björn Tillenius | https://launchpad.net/~bjornt _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
