Re: Tool version in HACKING

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

   From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
   Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:07:42 -0500

   I'm not sure I follow.  I can see why we might want to have
   references to bugs from the TODO list; are you arguing for
   more than that?  (I don't think I adequately grokked your
   suggestion).

yes, more than that.  a reference to a bug is not as accurate
(wrt a todo list) as a reference to a bug *fix*, which is more
specific.  the proposal would conventionalize this, so that we
can have some greater confidence that TODO list items (relating
to bugs) are actually specific things to do.  the more specific
a TODO list, the easier it is to follow.

other concurrent processes are bugs prioritization and bugfix
execution, to name the two that are relevant.  often it is one
person that takes care of notation, prioritization, and
execution, and probably the result is most coherent if this is
the case, but it's a good idea to recognize the separate
processes anyway, so that the thinking that goes behind these
processes can be exposed and refined, and the parallizable parts
exploited.

bottom line: if the release manager wants to have a say in bugs
prioritization, it is helpful to see what the impact of the bug
fix is in terms of the other tasks (IMHO).  btw, what are your
thoughts on the duties of a release manager?  this question is
related to the roles that people play, overall.

thi