I do wonder why anyone thinks that it’s a good idea to not just fix a bug the moment you become aware of it. Bug-tracking systems have always struck me as weird. Don’t track them; fix them.
268
42
299
413
My guess is the reasons have something to do with reality
5
88
bug reality will also catch you sooner than later 🙂 we have practiced bugs first for a pretty long time and it really pays off quality wise
1
1
Yes, we measured the effects of a zero defect policy some years ago. Costs of defects decreased by ~20%. And there was no list of defects anymore with an amount of hidden costs. The discussion whether something is a defect or not is very expensive, as well as the mgmt of defects.
1
Well, we did not continue this road because the defect mgmt department was an *important* part of the company. So, there is some thing like reality that produces conflicts with the idea ;-)
1
1
Replying to @GerritBeine @_hALKo @allenholub
I don’t see a conflict between a zero bug tolerance policy and a bug tracking system, at least not for a system of non-trivial size that has users other than its developers

Feb 26, 2022 · 8:40 AM UTC

1
3
Replying to @stilkov @_hALKo @allenholub
That‘s why I use the defect mgmt as the argument, not the tracking system. How the dev team reaches the zero defect should be up to the team. If they really want to use a bts - why not?
1