Hi Arthur, On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 14:54 -0700, Arthur Richards wrote: > I don't think 'importance' should necessarily map to a timeframe for > resolution - at least not one that is set in stone.
With regard to the wider picture, the confusing and partially unclear concept "severity vs priority vs target milestone vs importance" can and should be discussed in the long run. For the specific problem I'd like to solve in the short run, we need to agree on a way to mark an issue as "we must fix this report as soon as possible and should drop nearly all over ongoing work". > It might be more useful to come up with a rubric of meanings for the > different priorities - eg: > * Highest = [snip] > * Lowest = I like your definitions a lot as they are very descriptive and provide clear criteria, but to me they fit very well with what "severity" (blocker, critical, ..., trivial, enhancement) in Bugzilla is supposed to mean. andre -- Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
