Hi Christian & Andre, First off, thanks for your continued comments. They are helpful to me in learning better about how QA should work.
>By priotirizing the ones with high prio, you basically doom the others >to rot. This could apply equally to QA prioritizing which issues to QA or to developers prioritizing which issues to fix. In either case I think it's a bit overgeneralized - prioritizing an issue does not mean never coming back to the other issues, it just means hitting that one first. It is true that issues set with lower priority get lost sometimes, which shouldn't happen, I agree. I do not focus exclusively on high priority issues when I do QA, but I do look through the high-priority issues first. If they have a higher priority then I feel they should get through the entire process of getting fixed faster, QA included. But I also understand that the lower priority issues get lost, which is why priority is not my sole criteria for which issues to tackle. >If people don't get to set the prio on fake issues themselves (i.e. >don't offer that in the bug-form), you won't have that problem. QA >should set a higher prio if necessary. >Given your statements, I don't understand why you're advocating to add a >priotiry-control to the bug-form. Having heard your points, I can see that a direct interface for the user to "trick" the priority to be higher isn't a good idea. Maybe instead we could have some of those priority-related questions go into the description as it is generated (such as "Does this break a major point of functionality," or "Does this make OOo unuseably slow"). These questions would be listed with checkboxes and appear in the description as a line that says something like "User reports that issue breaks major funcionality: true". (Or would this make the simple interface too complicated?) That way a QA volunteer can see more easily where an issue should get a priority upgrade without giving the user a way to "trick" the priority. Although this begs another question... when the simple interface is created, will the advanced (current) interface still be available to all users? If so, then malicious users filing a new issue could just go to the advanced interface and trick the priority there by setting it higher. If we want to avoid that problem completely we would have to revoke access to the advanced interface from regular users... Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
