On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 12:47 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:36:54 -0700
Adam Williamson <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>
> For the record, we do in fact have a policy on this:
>
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#Priority_and_...
>
> I wouldn't exactly claim that it's universally followed, but it *is*
> there. I do still follow those rules for 'severity' when dealing with
> bugs, for whatever it's worth.
> Well, it also doesn't make as much sense with
'triager' in there and no
triagers around. ;)
A triager is one who triages. I still triage things sometimes. I'm like
the triage ninja. You never see me coming. ;)
Back to this case, I am not a DNF developer/maintainer, but I can
think
of lots of things I would personally prioritze over a slowness issue in
fedora-review (data loss bugs, bugs that prevent people from getting
updates, crashing bugs, bugs that stop releng from doing things they
need to do, etc). In any case, priority/severity should be left to the
maintainers to decide (if they want to use them at all).
I think the distinction in the policy is a sensible one: 'severity' is
something vaguely objectively quantifiable, which we can attempt to
have a universal policy for. 'priority' is entirely at the responsible
maintainer/team's discretion and shouldn't be set by anyone else.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net