Re: aged bugs

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Ian Hickson <> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 2010, at 8:33 AM, Laura Carlson wrote:
>> >
>> > The following accessibility bugs were recently downgraded from P2 to
>> > P3 without explanation:
>> For what it's worth, the "Priority" field in Bugzilla has no meaning
>> with respect to the HTML WG Decision Policy. If any of the editors want
>> to use this field for personal tracking purpose, they are free to do so.
>> However this particular change seems to have confused a number of
>> people, so if Ian wants to explain his use of priority fields, or at
>> least let the WG know that we don't need to be concerned about this
>> field, that would be helpful.
> I was normalising the priority field so that I could use it to prioritise
> work; for example, non-editorial bugs that affect implementors are more
> important than non-editorial bugs that affect authors, which are
> themselves more important than any kind of editorial bug. When I get
> requests to prioritise non-editorial bugs I can use the priority field to
> keep track of these requests. In general all bugs should be "normal P3"
> unless I've received a request to prioritise something.
> HTH,
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL

So evidently the priority field does have meaning. Considering some of
the bugs I've filed, you've still left me confused, because several of
the bugs I've filed will impact on both implementors as well as

One also has to ask, in light of Maciej's assertion above: if your
plan is to act on all bug in a week, why prioritize?


Received on Monday, 4 January 2010 21:12:43 UTC