Hi Nyall, Tim,
> I'd prefer to prioritise a High priority bug which affects 90% of > users over a regression which affects 0.05% of users. Eg something > like http://hub.qgis.org/issues/16001 is a regression (I suspect it's > upstream though, that's why I closed it), but the conditions to > experience it are so obscure that I wouldn't want to see this targeted > over any high priority bugs! well, as you cite a case that is at one end of the spectrum we may want to be fair and cite cases at the other end, like broken widely used core functionalities left as such (for years in some case). Tim, you say "In an ideal world, the person who introduced the regression should be the one that fixes it but we don't have the leverage to enforce that.". Why the project won't have the leverage to enforce such policy? seems a fair one. cheers! -- G -- _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
