Re: MABs and priority

Hi Bjoern, all,
Le 17/01/2014 12:01, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 06:21:48PM +0000, Michael Meeks wrote:
> >     + All Most Annoying Bugs -> priority Highest (Bjoern)
>
> This is done now too, so right now, all NEW bugs(*) with priority highest should
> also block a MAB and all NEW bugs blocking a MAB should be priority highest.
>
> I updated the MAB instructions to include setting "priority: highest" when
> adding a bug to MAB.
>
> for QA, this means two things, one short term, one long term.
>
> == short term ==
>
> To keep the highest=MAB equivalence clean, some regular (weekly?) checking for
> bugs that are priority:highest and not a MAB would be needed. Such bugs could
> be seen as "proposed MABs" and either be:
> - promoted to a MAB with the usual procedure (rationale etc.)
> - or respectfully rejected and bumped to priority:high
>
> Someone volunteering for this task?
>
> If so, it would be interesting:
> - how many such bugs there are each week
> - what is their quality (as in: how many are good MABs? how many are well triaged?)

For information, I've forwarded and translated your mail to our qa list.
I'll have a look today to those bugs having priority:highest and not in
the Mab yet.
Cheers
Sophie