30 ms·

A good reason is the zero-bug policy. In my previous company, we introduced this policy to limit the expansion of the backlog. Project Managers have to close is

by aragot 12y ago

A good reason is the zero-bug policy. In my previous company, we introduced this policy to limit the expansion of the backlog. Project Managers have to close issues that they don't actually plan to tackle, which is a very difficult exercise in honesty and transparency, but which provides customers with visibility.

NotOscarWilde 12y ago
> Project Managers have to close issues that they don't actually plan to tackle, which is a very difficult exercise in honesty and transparency I understand honesty, but I don't see how closing bugs makes it more transparent for the customers/users. Suppose there is such a bug you do not plan to fix. As a user, I can appreciate you stating that, but that does not mean the bug ceases to exist and should be hidden from the users' eyes. A few years ago, there were dozens of little bugs in GNU/Linux that appeared only for some people some of the time. NVIDIA driver issues, keyboard backlight support, and so on. These were also of the kind where we couldn't expect an official fix, but still there was a Ubuntu wiki, Debian wiki, Arch wiki, Gentoo wiki and many other places where you could find a workaround for your specific bug. To me, allowing "the community" to help itself on bugs that you do not plan to fix helps transparency much more than hiding your bug by setting it to "obsolete". It may not apply well to your particular company, but for Google's Android, a Linux distribution, it would be ideal.
- d2p 12y ago
  Marking them as obsolete doesn't hide them; nor stop them being reopened if they're deemed worthwhile!
  - crististm 12y ago
    How does that work? You invest some time to fill the bug and then someone decides that it's obsolete. Then, if you still care, you reopen it? Is that right? Now what message do I get from this besides: "We don't care about your shitty two year old phone. Buy a new one now. It will be shit again in just two years. And don't bother sending bug reports. We're in the business of selling phones not fixing bugs."
    - throwaway90999 12y ago
      Yes, that's the honesty and transparency. The truth is that Google doesn't care; this bug isn't a priority. So the options available are 1) leave the bug open and ignore it or 2) be honest and close it as "obsolete" Both options have the same result: no bugfix. However option #2 is a lot more transparent. Part of that transparency is your being aware that Google simply does not care.
slantedview 12y ago
Yes, the message is transparent - don't buy our devices because we won't support them.

by aragot 12y ago

NotOscarWilde 12y ago

> Project Managers have to close issues that they don't actually plan to tackle, which is a very difficult exercise in honesty and transparency I understand honesty, but I don't see how closing bugs makes it more transparent for the customers/users. Suppose there is such a bug you do not plan to fix. As a user, I can appreciate you stating that, but that does not mean the bug ceases to exist and should be hidden from the users' eyes. A few years ago, there were dozens of little bugs in GNU/Linux that appeared only for some people some of the time. NVIDIA driver issues, keyboard backlight support, and so on. These were also of the kind where we couldn't expect an official fix, but still there was a Ubuntu wiki, Debian wiki, Arch wiki, Gentoo wiki and many other places where you could find a workaround for your specific bug. To me, allowing "the community" to help itself on bugs that you do not plan to fix helps transparency much more than hiding your bug by setting it to "obsolete". It may not apply well to your particular company, but for Google's Android, a Linux distribution, it would be ideal.

d2p 12y ago
Marking them as obsolete doesn't hide them; nor stop them being reopened if they're deemed worthwhile!
- crististm 12y ago
  How does that work? You invest some time to fill the bug and then someone decides that it's obsolete. Then, if you still care, you reopen it? Is that right? Now what message do I get from this besides: "We don't care about your shitty two year old phone. Buy a new one now. It will be shit again in just two years. And don't bother sending bug reports. We're in the business of selling phones not fixing bugs."
  - throwaway90999 12y ago
    Yes, that's the honesty and transparency. The truth is that Google doesn't care; this bug isn't a priority. So the options available are 1) leave the bug open and ignore it or 2) be honest and close it as "obsolete" Both options have the same result: no bugfix. However option #2 is a lot more transparent. Part of that transparency is your being aware that Google simply does not care.

slantedview 12y ago

Yes, the message is transparent - don't buy our devices because we won't support them.