[Interest] Priority of bugs

[Konstantin Tokarev]

20.09.2018, 15:59, "Krzysztof Kawa" <krzysiek.kawa at gmail.com>:
> Hi,
> I really hate to be "that guy" again, but I'd just like to know what's going on.
>
> Some time ago I complained about bugs not being resolved for many
> major releases. I was then told my reports were P2 or lower and I
> can't expect them to be taken care of. That sucks for me but I can
> understand to some degree.
> But now a new release is out and I still have three P1:Critical
> issues, reported 3 or 4 releases ago, all being regressions btw, and
> nothing is fixed. There's a next major release around the corner and
> it doesn't seem to fix these either.
>
> Are only P0 reports looked at?

Only P0 bugs block releases, others don't have predicatable schedule.

You may get fixes faster if
* you contact maintainers of respective code and provide additional
information such as debugging details
* you convince people that priority should be promoted to P0
* you contribute fixes yourself

> Why do we even have other categories if
> they are all treated the same way?

To sort issues by priority in JIRA queries, of course :)

>
> It feels like more and more features I don't need are being added and
> more and more features I've been using for years are randomly broken
> in new releases and never fixed back while hanging in jira limbo.
>
> Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a clear policy like certain P level
> is fixed or at least a workaround proposed in the span of X releases
> at which point they become a block or are dropped entirely? And
> shouldn't regressions be treated more seriously? If a new feature has
> a bug I just don't start to use it, no problem, but if something
> breaks after update I'd like to at least know I can skip a release and
> wait for a fix. Now I don't know if it ever gets fixed again.
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin