4 ms·

> - Improves morale I'd buy this if the bug was actually gone. But it's not! Closing a bug report doesn't make the bug go away! > - Focuses the team A decent

by gspr 4y ago

> - Improves morale I'd buy this if the bug was actually gone. But it's not! Closing a bug report doesn't make the bug go away! > - Focuses the team A decent bug tracker should have priority levels for various bugs, surely. > - Makes the task more approachable I don't understand. Can you elaborate? > The important ones will probably bubble up again in due time. This seems like a terrible waste of everyone's time.

KingOfCoders 4y ago
> I'd buy this if the bug was actually gone. But it's not! Closing a bug report doesn't make the bug go away! It does improve morale. Developers see a mountain of bugs they could never fix. > I don't understand. Can you elaborate? Say you have 100 bugs open for 10 developers, and you close all bugs older than 6 months. Then you go through the remaining one and close all the ones who have no impact ("css line should be 2 pixel but is one pixel") on customers and you get to 30. Then you implement (better) code reviews, phase injection analysis (in which phase a bug was introduced, E.g. missing requirement, and where it was found E.g. customer), enforce static tools (Clippy) policy. Then you do two bug fixing sprints and refactoring of code that gets a high amount of bugs and you have a manageable bug count of 10 (1/dev instead of 10/dev) which keeps low because of the quality improvements you made. > This seems like a terrible waste of everyone's time. No managing hundreds of bugs in a bugtracker that do not get fixed is a terrible waste of everyone's time.
- gspr 4y ago
  > It does improve morale. Developers see a mountain of bugs they could never fix. So you propose that telling them that the mountain is gone will actually make them believe that it is? > No managing hundreds of bugs in a bugtracker that do not get fixed is a terrible waste of everyone's time. How do bug tracker entries waste people's time? Sure, confirming or fixing or otherwise working on a bug takes time, but that's hardly wasted. And if the bug just sits there, how does it waste time?
  - ZephyrBlu 4y ago
    > So you propose that telling them that the mountain is gone will actually make them believe that it is? Yes... at least in the short term. Think about seeing 100 issues vs 1000 issues. 1000 issues is clearly more demotivating. It's also a lot harder to tackle because of the sheer amount. You don't have enough time to fix all of them, so how to do you prioritize and distribute the work? With 100 issues you can get stuck in much quicker and prevent those 1000 issues from stacking up again. > How do bug tracker entries waste people's time? Sure, confirming or fixing or otherwise working on a bug takes time, but that's hardly wasted. And if the bug just sits there, how does it waste time? How many bugs do not have payoff proportional to the time spent triaging and working on them? Probably most. Cutting a whole lot of issues probably makes the 'right' decision for >50% of them.

by gspr 4y ago

KingOfCoders 4y ago

> I'd buy this if the bug was actually gone. But it's not! Closing a bug report doesn't make the bug go away! It does improve morale. Developers see a mountain of bugs they could never fix. > I don't understand. Can you elaborate? Say you have 100 bugs open for 10 developers, and you close all bugs older than 6 months. Then you go through the remaining one and close all the ones who have no impact ("css line should be 2 pixel but is one pixel") on customers and you get to 30. Then you implement (better) code reviews, phase injection analysis (in which phase a bug was introduced, E.g. missing requirement, and where it was found E.g. customer), enforce static tools (Clippy) policy. Then you do two bug fixing sprints and refactoring of code that gets a high amount of bugs and you have a manageable bug count of 10 (1/dev instead of 10/dev) which keeps low because of the quality improvements you made. > This seems like a terrible waste of everyone's time. No managing hundreds of bugs in a bugtracker that do not get fixed is a terrible waste of everyone's time.

gspr 4y ago
> It does improve morale. Developers see a mountain of bugs they could never fix. So you propose that telling them that the mountain is gone will actually make them believe that it is? > No managing hundreds of bugs in a bugtracker that do not get fixed is a terrible waste of everyone's time. How do bug tracker entries waste people's time? Sure, confirming or fixing or otherwise working on a bug takes time, but that's hardly wasted. And if the bug just sits there, how does it waste time?
- ZephyrBlu 4y ago
  > So you propose that telling them that the mountain is gone will actually make them believe that it is? Yes... at least in the short term. Think about seeing 100 issues vs 1000 issues. 1000 issues is clearly more demotivating. It's also a lot harder to tackle because of the sheer amount. You don't have enough time to fix all of them, so how to do you prioritize and distribute the work? With 100 issues you can get stuck in much quicker and prevent those 1000 issues from stacking up again. > How do bug tracker entries waste people's time? Sure, confirming or fixing or otherwise working on a bug takes time, but that's hardly wasted. And if the bug just sits there, how does it waste time? How many bugs do not have payoff proportional to the time spent triaging and working on them? Probably most. Cutting a whole lot of issues probably makes the 'right' decision for >50% of them.