--- Comment #21 from Santiago Dueñas <sdue...@bitergia.com> ---
(In reply to Quim Gil from comment #20)
> Santi, yesterday Andre and me agreed that the information provided by the
> "Time to close" graphs isn't very useful to us. Not only the very high peaks
> make the rest impossible to analyze. The main problem is that those reports
> don't tell us much about the trends, what should we do better, what is the
> call to action.
The other day Jesus and I were discussing about it and we find that these
charts are not useful if we do not include bugs that are still opened,
unattended or uncommented. Tomorrow we can talk about it during the confcall.
> The graphs about the age of reports open without action do show trends and
> where should we improve. In fact Andre is missing already the ones based on
> For all these reasons we propose to have these graphs, in this order:
> Age of reports without any action by priority & severity
> Age of reports without any comment by priority & severity
> Age of reports unresolved by priority & severity
I've also include some help messages to clarify what the charts mean. Please
have a look to the message and let me know whether you understand them or not,
or if you want to change some terms, for instance, tickets to bugs/reports,
I still have to add the number of bugs in the info boxes and filter those
components that are not key projects.
> If you still think it makes sense to have graphs of the age of
> closed/actioned/commented reports let's discuss, but after we leave this KPI
> ready for this iteration. It's already March and there is still a lot to do.
> Thank you!
BTW, sorry with the delay with this. To get the "age" data from actions and
comments was tricker than I thought.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list