Re: Bug tracking in the run up from 2.5 to 2.6

mgross
2002-10-18T16:32:52Z

On Thursday 17 October 2002 07:02 pm, Timothy D. Witham wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 15:52, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> > We're proposing to create a bug tracking system to help keep track of
> > 2.5 kernel bugs ... in an attempt to help get 2.5 stabilised as quickly
> > as possible.
> >

Defect tracking works best when used over a significant portion of the
product life cycle. In this case this bug data base will be of more use and
value to 2.6 than anything else. You'll need to be patient and persistant. I
think something good has a chance of coming out of this.

Prioritizing bugs and bug fix activities is a political and user / market
driven activity. It'll be interesting to watch this shake out. I wish you
all the best of luck.

Defect tracking and fixing is a "push" activity. The owners of
the bug data base and "the product" along with input from key stake holders,
dictate the priority and owners of issues (pushes the responsibility onto an
owner). The owners then go and make fixes. This tends to be effective in
hierarchical organizations.

The Linux development model is more of a pull model. Someone finds a bug
takes it upon them selves to fix it (pulls the responsibility onto
themselves), and then attempts to get the fix accepted. If bugs in some
areas sit around too long it becomes an opportunity for someone new to step
up.

Perhaps if you set up the bug queries as a type of advertisement of the "most
wanted bugs" that aren't getting attention could proved a nice place
for folks to look if they are interested in getting involved / helping out.
It could also become a type of "wall of shame". You'll need to be carefull
to keep things positive.

--mgross