Introducing time wasters

Daniel D. Daugherty daniel.daugherty at
Mon Sep 24 18:41:21 UTC 2018

On 9/24/18 1:43 PM, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2018, at 10:38 AM, jesper.wilhelmsson at wrote:
>>> I suggest someone very quickly makes an /executive decision/ to: pick an
>>> ok name from the many extant suggestions and mandate its use,
>>> irrespective of any subsequently expressed preferences. Honestly, silver
>>> was a a bad idea but grey will be fine.
>>> Jesper? I think the ball is in your court!
>> Thank you all for your contributions to this discussion!
>> I have read through all suggestions and there are several examples to suggest that a label is the right way to go, so I'll stick to that. As for naming, these are a few of the arguments that both support my initial idea, and seem to have support in the discussion:
>> "The point of this tag is to emphasise that the bug is costly in developer time while it remains present i.e. that it is a priority to fix this."
>> "From my exp long labels tend not to be used and no, JIRA suggestions do not help. I'll be happy to see a positive short label."
>> A label like "urgent" or "fix-urgent" would satisfy these aspects, but after some mulling over this I concluded that these are too generic and could be placed on any P1 bug. I wanted to capture the developer/maintainer aspect as well, not just that a bug is critical to fix. So comments like:
>> "Rather than make it specific to 'dev' or 'developers', perhaps..."
>> ... "This suggests labels that include the token “maintainer.”"
>> "...this thread started with a desire to draw attention to pain (rather than opportunity)"
>> make me think that the best suggestion so far is maintainer-pain.
> Works for me!
> Cheers,
> Mikael

Also works for me.


More information about the jdk-dev mailing list