Retargeting enhancements

[David Miller]

Frédéric Buclin wrote on 11/10/05 2:02 PM:

> My suggestion is to retarget all enhancement bugs targetted 2.22 to --- 
> and let each assignee retarget them back to 2.24 if they are (still) 
> working on them (and marking the bug as ASSIGNED to make it clear). In a 
> month or so, all enhancement bugs targetted --- should be reassign to 
> the default assignee (and QA contact for the older ones), showing 
> clearly that anyone can take it (this way, these bugs will also fall 
> back to UNCO or NEW, cleaning up old ASSIGNED bugs). This will give us a 
> good idea of which bugs have real activity.

Ooh, I like that idea.

>> need architectural changes before they can be implemented?  Do we have 
>> someone willing to triage the "Future" stuff periodically and 
>> "defuture" things that required architectural changes that have been 
>> made since they were filed?

> Do you really want to triage more than 2000 open bugs?? Let's retarget 
> them to --- and don't waste your time triaging bugs targetted Future or 
> ---. More important (from my point of view) is to triage old open bugs 
> and close those we don't want to fix and those who have been fixed 
> already or are no longer applicable.

We'll have to eventually if we want our sanity back.  But it can 
certainly be an ongoing project and not something someone has to waste a 
lot of time on right this minute.

-- 
Dave Miller                                   http://www.justdave.net/
System Administrator, Mozilla Corporation      http://www.mozilla.com/
Project Leader, Bugzilla Bug Tracking System  http://www.bugzilla.org/