3 ms·
> Or in the "packrat project manager" scenario, there may be tons of low priority nice-to-have tickets that have been sitting around for months or years, even t
by elwell 11y ago
> Or in the "packrat project manager" scenario, there may be tons of low priority nice-to-have tickets that have been sitting around for months or years, even though everyone knows they'll never be worked on any time soon. If this is the case, the graph is still "sad", but it's not a death spiral... it's just a sign of a wasteful and broken issue tracking process.
What's wrong with keeping a few hundred "low priority" issues in your tracker as long as they are labeled properly?
- makmanalp 11y agoI guess what matters is: do they get tended to, cleaned up regularly, and do people get to them eventually? In my experience, the answer is usually no.
- ryandrake 11y agoIf a bug has been in the software for years, and tons of people aren't complaining about it, does it really need to be gotten to eventually? Those should be resolved as "won't fix".
- simoncion 11y agoI can't agree. When I find myself in the mood, and with a bit of time on my hands, investigating -and sometimes fixing- these low-priority bugs is often a fun and useful way to spend an otherwise wasted part of a workday.
- sandal 11y agoKeep in mind this is a 500 newly opened issues over a period of four months, and that the backlog did not start at zero. So this is thousands of issues accumulating over a year.