Do people use a triage group to asses bugs before giving to development to fix? Do you feel they are worth while?
We used to have a daily meeting were reps from each dev functional group and QA met to evaluate the bug and assign ownership - but this is not the way to do it. We got TeamTrack and changed all that. Now we allow the submitter to assign a business priority and once the bug is assigned to an owner of a dev group (usually a manger for that team but not always), they can assing an IT prioirty. No more daily meetings and this is working VERY well.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Steve8033:
Do people use a triage group to asses bugs before giving to development to fix? Do you feel they are worth while?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have done so, but only at the very end of the development cycle, just before release.
Any earlier than that seemed not to be worth the effort.
Best of luck.
- Joe (email@example.com)
We don't use a "triage group" for defects, but prioritize issues upon submission. The submitter assigns whatever level they feel the issue is (critical, high, med, low) based on a set of guide lines from our methodology. The issue is routed after submission to a development manager who assigns the resource and may change the priority.
This seems to work very well for our organization. We have a "triage group" that handles new client requests (we meet once a week).
I have used triage in a couple different scenarios.
The most popular and effective one went like this:
1) QA assigns both severity AND priority to start with.
2) Developer has the option to contest the priority, but if that's done and QA does not agree, then the project manager decides.
3) 2 times per week (or however often is appropriate for your release cycles) QA Manager, Project Manager and Development Manager get together and triage the status, severity and priority of all high priority and critical severity bugs. They either reprioritize them or get them allocated to developer for fixing/testing, etc.
In this way, all serious issues are being addressed, the lower tier bugs get handled after the serious ones and not by the managers. Sometimes lower severity bugs get escalated based on their age during triage.
Triage meetings were kept to a half an hour maximum.
Hope that helps.
The bugs are inserted in a tool. The tester job finishes here.
After that, depending on the severity, the bug gets a proprity, and a "lead" take them to a meeting as told above.