| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Sergey Popov wrote: |
| 3 |
>> As i said earlier, problem begins when we NEED to stabilize |
| 4 |
>> something to prevent breakages and arch teams are slow. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Isn't that simply a matter of assigning and respecting priority on |
| 7 |
> bugs properly? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Are you suggesting that we should forbid people from working on |
| 10 |
lower-priority bugs anytime a higher-priority bug exists? That would |
| 11 |
probably just reduce the amount of contribution. You can't force |
| 12 |
anybody to work on the higher-priority ones. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Sure, in an ideal world people work on the high-priority stuff. |
| 15 |
However, often somebody either prefers to work on a lower-priority |
| 16 |
bug, or finds it easier to do so. Simply marking a bug as |
| 17 |
high-priority doesn't make the bug get resolved. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Bottom line is that people work on what they work on. Unless you can |
| 20 |
find people to work on the stuff that you want done you need to make |
| 21 |
work go away. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Rich |
Archives