Collecting and fixing pet peeve bugs

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl
Fri Aug 4 17:31:53 UTC 2006



Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 07:00:29PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Or a bugzilla keyword.
>> That might be a good idea, or a blocker bug. How do we make sure that
>> not too many or too obscure bugs get set to this keyword / blockerbug?
>> Just remove abusing bugs?
> 
> Yeah, although we'd have to carefully pick the keyword so as to not offend
> someone if *their* pet peeve bug got removed.
> 
I must say I'm more in favor of a blocker bug (since I'm unfamiliar with
the use of keywords)

> Perhaps have a way to *nominate* a bug for addition, and only add one after
> a certain amount of interest?
> 
Hmm, I think we should first come up with a tracking mechanism for bugs
like this, see how it works and only create procedures surrounding this
tracking mechanism if they are needed.

Regards,

Hans




More information about the devel mailing list