On 2011-09-20 20:22, Stuart Bishop wrote:
There was a formula from an agile seminar I can never remember where
you take the average time to fix bugs, rate of incoming bugs and end
up with a timeframe. Any bugs hanging around longer than this
timeframe are WONTFIX by definition, because the incoming rate of more
important bugs multiplied by your velocity means you will never get
around to it. So when a bug gets into that list it means one of a) Its
been badly prioritized and you dropped it on the floor b) It will only
be fixed by accident, such as becoming irrelevant or c) You're
screwed.
Or something like that. Anyone remember? I think my notes are buried
in a box somewhere (Damn paper notes! How last millennium!)
I think that was our collective Lean course. Mr. Poppendieck gave me a
brief version of this advice in private conversation when I brought up
the problem, but I think it subsequently also came up as course
material. It was a real eye-opener.
Ironically, it was the week before we had a very similar discussion to
the incumbent one, where management insisted that a particular page be
driven down to zero timeouts, which we said was asymptotically
impossible. It was eventually resolved with bigger hardware. On a
sidenote, Stuart, thanks for being the voice of reason that day!
Jeroen
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev
Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
