[rabbitmq-discuss] rabbitmq bugs and issue database

Sat Nov 8 08:52:11 GMT 2008

Hi Matthias,

I take your point that like-for-like comparison is very hard; I'm only
attempting to get an impression;

For example, a colleague informs me that MULE has 679 open issues, 39 of
which are critical and 200 plus major. Those in progress (i.e being
worked on) is 8.  The "core" components appear to hold in excess of 200
of those issues. Core routing / filters alone has 45.

Terracotta has some 360+ open JIRAs, 5 critical, and only 5 in progress.

As you suggest 'critical' could mean something quite different in MULE
to Terracotta - but it does provide an important impression none-the-less.

Personally, I'd define a 'blocker' as being a high customer impact
defect which is the result of a core use-case failure with collateral
damage and for which there is no work-around.  'major' would be of
medium priority to customers and would result from a use-case defect
for which a workaround could be found, examples might include inaccurate
calculations.  'critical' would be somewhere in between.

However, for the purposes of my query, I'm interested in the number of
genuine bugs in your database and an indication of the numbers in the 
highest severity/priority categories - however you define them.

Regards

Graham

Matthias Radestock wrote:
> Graham,
>
> rrabarg2 wrote:
>> Could you give me an idea of how many bugs are on the database at the 
>> moment, and how many are critical and major?
>
> What exactly do you mean by "bug"? In our bug database we track almost 
> every single piece of work we (want to) do, whether that involves a 
> genuine bug, a new feature, or tasks like discussing some aspect of 
> the protocol with the working group, redesigning the rabbitmq web 
> site, etc, etc.
>
> Similarly, what do you mean by "critical" and "major"? Having seen 
> bug/issue tracking systems in many organisations I can attest to the 
> fact that there is a vast difference in how they are being used. 
> Like-for-like comparisons are impossible.
>
> In terms of evaluating rabbitmq for use in your organisation, do you 
> have some specific metrics in mind?
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthias.
>