[Interest] Priority of bugs

[Thiago Macieira]

On Thursday, 20 September 2018 08:20:23 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> 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.

No. P0 means "stop whatever you're doing and fix this now". It doesn't block a 
release, it block any further work.

P1 blocks a release.

Or at least it should. Sometimes a bug is mis-prioritised. More often, we 
override at release time saying "it's better to release this now than to wait 
longer until everything is fixed".

> 
> 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're not going to promote to P0 unless you're a developing Qt itself. If 
you're not following the Git repository, then new issues cannot block your 
work by definition.

> * 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 :)
-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center