[lsb-discuss] Going through the bugs for LSB 4.0

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Tue Mar 11 08:16:41 PDT 2008

> In fact, if you think we would be better off asking say, you, Stew,
> and Jeff to do quick pass through those bugs to add any missing
> details first, would that make more sense first?  The bottom line is
> that I would like us to be able to have concrete priorities done
> before the face-to-face meeting, and in order to make sure we have
> that, it probably means we should aim to get an initial prioritization
> done by the end of the March.  So maybe aiming for the prioritization
> ballots to be done by March 21st is more realistic, with perhaps a
> grooming pass before that?
> Does that sound better to you?

Yes, it helps some.

By the way, we ought to agree on a convention for requests to
add new features (I mean real new functionality, not something
like "we forgot to include xdr_destroy" which I would consider
a bug).  These used to be tracked in lsb-futures, and might or
might not have a bug associated with them.  Now they're going 
to primarily be tracked in a wiki page-per-feature, which is 
fine for tracking the feature but doesn't give an overview of 
things in the queue. So I'd like to have a bug for each one, 
flagged as an Enhancement request rather than having a specific 
severity. Then we can go ahead and adjust priority and target
milestone as we're doing for other things.  I have taken this 
action for all bugs which were assigned to lsb-futures, and
I'm going to close out the futures bucket so new bugs are not
assigned there.

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list