On 11/30/2011 04:54 PM, Francis J. Lacoste wrote: > Hello launchpadders, > > Last week on the TL call, we agreed on a change in the way to track our > critical inventory. > > Like the critical analysis showed, we have a deep mine of undiscovered > critical showing up or waiting to be filed. We don't know how deep the > mine is, but until we address the tech-debt sustaining it (design for > performance, test coverage, etc.) we'll keep getting new ones. Tracking > these ones doesn't really give us a good indicator on whether we are > improving in quality or not. > > So we need to track criticals introduced by new work separately so that > we can ensure that we are improving our quality, or at the bare minimum, > not degrading. (And address quickly degradation trends.) > > We already have a tag for regressions. But we don't have a tag for > critical bugs introduced by new features. So what should we use to group > these? I know that each feature have their own tag, (currently > disclosure and bug-columns for example), but it would be easier for > historical tracking if there was a common tag that was always used. > > 'feature' could be it, but we use it to indicate bugs that are really > feature request. > > So I'm looking for suggestions. > > Cheers > > What about feature-regression or regression-feature?
Micah _______________________________________________ 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
