Oh, and wrt prioritization, even though SF permits 10 levels of priority
per bug, there doesn't seem to be much need for more than four levels:
high(9), med(6), low(3), and unprioritized(5).
We use the prioritization for 'criticality' rather than implementation
order (which is unpredictable).
Crash bugs are generally always high(9), as are bugs related to file
open/save problems, file corruption, loss of backup, or other things
that could cause data loss for users or prevent them from being able to
use the application.
Bugs which affect usability, functionality, behavior, etc. are generally
medium(6), although important ones are bumped up to high and unimportant
ones are dropped to low.
Quirks, really obscure things, and minor nit picky things would be
The prioritization level isn't used to indicate when the bug will be
fixed. Bugs seem to get fixed whenever their time has come. That said,
we do try to make an extra effort to address all the critical bugs prior
to a release.
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Kees Cook wrote:
> say, is there any kind of "method" we should follow when going over
> people's bug reports, patches, etc? I didn't find anything in the Wiki
> about it.