Ashar Voultoiz wrote: > The bugmeister position could be the one in between the two roles and > setting the priority accordingly. Each level of priorities would need > different review frequencies which you described properly. > > My recommendation: lock the priority field to a handful of people > excluding the end users and developers.
Locking the field would deter gnome-labour on bugzilla. I wouldn't lock it more than the equivalent of an autoconfirmed level. Although given that it is defined as how often the Bugmeister will look at the bug, I don't think other people would be interested on it or even find it useful. > == severity == > > I do not like the proposed severity meanings. They should be described > as the effect/impact on the software. A proposition would be: > > blocker: prevents development work > critical: affecting the whole software (crash, data lost...) > major: making only part of the software unusable, regressions, make a > functionality totally unusable. > normal: default > minor: not important functionality change, workaround exist > trivial: nice to have, comments issues, cosmetic, typos .. > enhancement: feature request I would usually call a crash or data lost a blocker (although it could be downgraded if they affect just one piece -like the installer- or happens only once in a blue moon). _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
