"Root Bug" or "Master Bug"?
dwierenga at valueclick.com
Thu Feb 21 00:31:06 UTC 2008
I like the term "master bug" much better. My reasoning:
a) "root bug" immediately makes me think of some issue regarding a Unix
superuser. Not so good for my blood pressure. Trivial, however,
b) There's a lot of "tree" terminology already, and this doesn't mesh.
You've got a trunk, and you've got some branches. And now you're going
to define a "root bug" which will almost certainly sit on a branch and
not at the gravity-facing end of the trunk where you'd expect to find
Just my $0.02 though.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org [mailto:developers-
> owner at bugzilla.org] On Behalf Of Max Kanat-Alexander
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:20 PM
> To: developers at bugzilla.org
> Subject: "Root Bug" or "Master Bug"?
> So, there's a system for "branches" that I've proposed here:
> I was wondering whether you prefer the term "master bug" or
> "root bug" for the bug that represents the "main" bug in the
> relationship, for those who've read the spec on that bug. (The spec
> calls it "root cause", but for the good reason mentioned in comment
> that's out of the running.)
> Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
More information about the developers