[Sur] [Sugar-devel] triage meeting

[Gonzalo Odiard]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez en gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 9 April 2014, Gonzalo Odiard <godiard en sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez en gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> This is an interesting blog post with a paragraph about GNOME triaging
>>>
>>> http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/enabling-participation/
>>>
>>> Interestingly it's pretty much exactly the same approach I followed with
>>> the triaging I had done with 0.100. It would be good to have a simple set
>>> of rule like that written down before the meeting. I think the way we
>>> triage has a huge impact on lowering contribution barriers,
>>>
>>>
>> +1
>>
>> We need at least verify  all the "Unconfirmed" tickets. We can start now,
>> don't need wait until the triage meeting.
>> I assume, if the bug is confirmed, we should set:
>> Milestone = 0.102
>> Status = New
>>
>
> I wonder about Milestone. It seems like it would only be useful if we
> assign different milestones to tickets and I'm not sure we can do that
> without being able to allocate resources to fix them. It's also a time
> consuming task.
>

True.


>
>
>> or close them if are not longer present.
>>
>> Would be good if we can reset all the priorities to "Unassigned",
>> in all the  tickets with module=Sugar,the field content does not have any
>> sense right now.
>>
>
> Do we want to use the field? Otherwise maybe there is a way to just get
> rid of it.
>
>
>
Just to mark they have been  triaged, and based in the querys used in
bugs.sugarlabs.org home.
Do you propose doing in another way?


-- 
Gonzalo Odiard

SugarLabs - Software for children learning
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/olpc-sur/attachments/20140409/c6958a2f/attachment.html>