On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:50:56AM -0000, Martin Pool wrote:
> I am not part of that consensus, and I think it's misguided.
I understand you disagree, but as a start, bug hotness is what we will
invest time in.
> If you can synthesize a "predicted importance" or "hotness" that's
> more useful than any single measure that's great. If you're doing it
> merely because you don't want to display a number for the reasons
> above I think it's irrational.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:50:56AM -0000, Martin Pool wrote:
> I am not part of that consensus, and I think it's misguided.
I understand you disagree, but as a start, bug hotness is what we will
invest time in.
> If you can synthesize a "predicted importance" or "hotness" that's
> more useful than any single measure that's great. If you're doing it
> merely because you don't want to display a number for the reasons
> above I think it's irrational.
It's more the former with a little bit of the latter. launchpad. net/~kiko
| [+55 16] 9112 6430 | http:// async.com. br/~kiko
--
Christian Robottom Reis | [+55 16] 3376 0125 | http://