On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Danilo Šegan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a polite request, at least for LP Translations: please do not > triage bugs for 'rosetta' unless *you* are starting on it right *now*. > > ("triage" means setting the status to something other than 'new': I go > through the 'new' queue regularly, basically every working day) > > 'rosetta' bugs are usually under control (and when they are left as > 'new' for a while, it's usually because I need to do further > investigation before I can properly triage it), and if you triage them > it only warrants a greater chance of me *not* seeing them, thus being > unaware of their existence. If I don't see it, it won't get scheduled > for the Translations team work. > > If that's what you want to achieve, you are still free to triage them :) > > Cheers, > Danilo
I'm very glad to know that you look at the translations bugs so regularly and closely; however this means that we need different rules for different facets of LP; if something is a timeout bug we have a policy which means anyone in the team (LP developers, for clarity) can triage it accurately (high, triaged, tag: timeout). But we need to *not* do that for Translations? It seems to me that making yourself into the sole triager creates a bottleneck and its less flexible than working with the shared data in the bugtracker and allowing anyone to triage (if they have the knowledge). I'm sure you wouldn't do that lightly though, so I'm very curious what defect in Malone is solved for you by doing this. -Rob _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
