Priority System for Enhancements

[Benton, Kevin]

Bill - I don't disagree, however, that requires code changes in order to
implement.  My suggestion requires no code changes and can be
implemented today (assuming that BMO product/component owners agree).  I
have been shifting toward features by bug_type in my own installations.
I'm also implementing default bug types per classification, but that
code is still very early in the coding stages.

Kevin Benton
Senior Software Developer
MSS Silicon Design Engineering
Advanced Micro Devices
 
The opinions stated in this communication do not necessarily reflect the
view of Advanced Micro Devices and have not been reviewed by management.
This communication may contain sensitive and/or confidential and/or
proprietary information.  Distribution of such information is strictly
prohibited without prior consent of Advanced Micro Devices.  This
communication is for the intended recipient(s) only.  If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender, then
destroy any remaining copies of this communication.
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org
[mailto:developers-owner at bugzilla.org]
> On Behalf Of Bill Barry
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 4:46 PM
> To: developers at bugzilla.org
> Subject: Re: Priority System for Enhancements
> 
> Benton, Kevin wrote:
> >
> >> 	To assist this (or basically implement it), I'm going to be
> >> prioritizing enhancements.
> >>
> >> 	P1 = We definitely want this. It's a major feature, and it's
> >> obvious that it would be useful to everybody.
> >>
> >> 	P2 = We want this, but it's not totally clear or extremely
> >> important.
> >>
> >> 	P3 = This isn't a bad idea, and maybe we'll want to implement
> >> it at some point in the future, but it's not near-term roadmap
> >> material. Some core Bugzilla developer may work on it.
> >>
> >> 	P4 = This isn't a terrible idea, but it's not important to our
> >> long-term plans for Bugzilla. We would review a patch if somebody
> >> posted it, but a core developer is unlikely to work on it.
> >>
> >> 	P5 = We basically never want this. If somebody implements it
> >> and asks for review, we *might* look at it.
> >>
> >
> > I'm wondering - there are cases when it might be useful to use
> > Enhancement_Urgent, Enhancement_Needed, Enhancement_Wanted,
> > Enhancement_Not_Likely as the severity rather than changing the
meaning
> > of Priority based on the status?  I'm saying this because I know of
a
> > number of Bugzilla users that have service level agreements set up
in
> > such a way so that the customer determines severity and the
developer
> > determines priority.
> <snip>
> 
> This is exactly why bug 9412 needs to be done.
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=kevin.benton@amd.com>
>