2 ms·
Usually people don't quit when I join and are rather happy that problems are solved instead of not solved. I would also not sit at my desk one day, and close a
by KingOfCoders 4y ago
Usually people don't quit when I join and are rather happy that problems are solved instead of not solved.
I would also not sit at my desk one day, and close all the bugs - but talk to developers, managers, leads, QA and product on how we solve the bug problems together. Slashing the number of bugs in the bugtracker is only one task and people didn't object but agreed to it as a way forward.
I created by first bugs 40 years ago, I've created bugs that brought down sites and have been a tech manager for 25+ years learning on the way on how to deal with bugs. From my experience: "fixing yet" this is the problem. It's not "yet" it's "ever". If a company doesn't fix bugs in 6 or 12 months, it's never spending enough time to fix these bugs because new feature development is always more important.
With the slashing of the bugs and a different approach to quality (E.g. fix bugs first) I would assume you're much happier that the bugs you report get fixed and developers are happy for your good bug reports than bug reports sitting in a bug tracker who no one acts upon.
- mpol 4y ago> ...rather happy that problems are solved instead of not solved. But they are not solved, are they? > With the slashing of the bugs... And it's not slashing bugs, but slashing bug reports. The bugs are still there.
- everforward 4y agoI would say that closing the bugs as WONTFIX is just changing the specs of the application so it's not a bug anymore. E.g. if you've got a bug that emojis cause an endpoint to throw a 500, closing the bug as WONTFIX is akin to just saying that emojis are invalid input to the application. After 6 months or a year, that's how everyone is treating it anyways.
- KingOfCoders 4y ago"But they are not solved, are they?" You might have overseen "and we implement ways to not reach high bug levels again"