Mark Mielke <mark_at_mark.mielke.cc> writes:
>I think this is only true in the sense that more users have a better
>chance of exposing existing problems. (Assuming the 'bugs' are actual
>bugs' and not feature requests)
>
>More bugs means more technical debt, which means less efficiency for
>the entire project over time. At some critical point, the product
>developers spend 100% of their time addressing defects and work
>arounds, and 0% of the time improving the product.
>
>Killing technical debt can be very important in terms of enabling
>features to be developed.
I just meant that a project shouldn't be ruled by its bug database (the
same way an individual shouldn't be ruled by their inbox).
The project should decide what's important; some of the important things
will be bugs, but some will also be new features. If a project thinks
of every filed bug as "technical debt", then it will be the software
equivalent of a tenant farmer for the rest of its life.
-Karl
Received on 2010-01-05 04:20:51 CET