I think it was doomed to fail as soon as people argued that an organization with an ~$80m annual budget had too many "resource constraints" to address a backlog of bugs in its core product. That happened in the first five or so replies to the thread!
On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 10:05 PM John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is a strange discussion, especially as it is now about how some > technical debts are not _real_ technical debts. You have some code, > and you change that code, and breakage emerge both now and for future > projects. That creates a technical debt. Some of it has a more > pronounced short time effect (user observed bugs), and some of has a > more long term effect (it blocks progress). At some point you must fix > all of them. > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:10 PM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It sounds like we have different perspectives. However, get the > impression > > that people are getting tired of the this topic, so I'll move on. > > I don't think this will be solved, so "move on" seems like an obvious > choice. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
