Hi Mike, > Exactly. The problem with the bugzilla priority field is that > there is no real definition of what "priority" means. Priority > to WHOM? I hardly touch that tag myself, although I might set it to high on severe crashes or security issues, or low to minor issues. But priority to the developer I would say. > What the overwhelming majority of people reporting bugs do not > realize, is that engineers receiving the bug reports, do not sit > in bugzilla 24/7 just fixing bugs. I do realize that very well. Otoh fixing bugs seems important to me. So if you can't spend enough time fixing bugs then I would say management is to blame. > In 3 years of experience on the receiving end of bug reports, and > having played "bug-priority-tag" with at least one or two people > a month for the first 6-8 months, I realized the priority field > was useless for the purposes that *I* was trying to use it for, > which was to indicate what priority the bug DOES have. I can understand that Alexander and you don't feel like educating the user every time this happens, but is this mentioned in the bugzilla accompanying docs? Just a warning: How not to piss of a developer by repeatedly changing tags and make him loose interest in your problem. > Since the priority field is so useless, I just totally stopped > ever even looking at it period. Maybe the tag should be kept around, just as a decoy, so users don't start playing "bug-severity-tag" with you ;) . > One needs to do that because it is impossible to try and manage a > 2000 item "TODO" list. That can be a challenge, I can see that. Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
