On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 22:00 +1200, Robert Collins wrote: > We have a choice: > - make the data utterly precise > - be a bit simpler and accept some inaccuracy
Simple and inaccurate. > I'd like to go with simpler an inaccurate for now because: > - we went for years with inaccurate counts unnoticed by users [ who > can tell that 700 should be 580, really?] > - the error rate is pretty low - my tests so far suggest ~5% [of > private bugs] - so the numbers won't be *far* off. > - being more precise will be more complex - we'll need to query > privacy separately We are fooling ourselves to think that bug data is stable enough to claim numbers are accurate for more than a minute. Bugs are in a constant state of change, especially for projects like Ubuntu. There may have been 1000 open bugs when you are the search page, but there ate 1002 when you choose a link to see. -- __Curtis C. Hovey_________ http://launchpad.net/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
