On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Kees Cook wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 11:53:48AM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Anyway, my question about how to measure when we've achieved our bug fixing goal for this release has not received any answer. How do we determine when we've fixed enough bugs, or the correct set of bugs, to be able to do a release? It is easier to get folks motivated to do bug fixing if there is a tangible goal we can focus on.
How about getting bug count down to 95 open? We were just at 124 open, so that's a good goal, I think. And I think we should close all the non-reproducible/non-responding bug reports that are older than the 0.39 release date.
John suggested that if we close 150 'points' worth of bugs, we should in theory get down to 100 or below. Of course, bugs will continue to be submitted while we go, so we'll see.
Invalidating the older bugs that cannot be reproduced today is a good idea, although I think they probably shouldn't count towards our score, just to keep us honest. I would suggest posting a request for an update to bugs that look non-reproducible and give someone a few days to respond, and if there are no responses then close it.
Oh, and all "level 9" bugs must get closed/recategorized.
Note that a few of the level 9 bugs are _really hard_, and I'm not sure there's sufficient time to rework the code enough to adequately address them... But yes, we definitely need to focus on the high priority bugs.
Update on the bugs...
Bug ID Pts Title ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1000350 9 --print option can attempt to open dialogs and segfault 1041757 (dup) undefined symbol: gdk_threads_lock 993294 9 RDF improperly exported with plain SVG 1024915 9 glib-2.5.2: crashes on clicking fill and stroke dialog ======================================================================== Total: 27 Goal: 150pts (18% towards goal)
(The --print bug was the extensions code trying to pop up a UI error alert box when running from cmdline; I changed it to a g_warning.)
Bryce