Sometimes, the fix for a severe bug may not be a priority. If you're a crypto exchange and your system allowed a duplicate deposit to happen once, human intervention can be the best cost-benefit solution if the cost to fix the problem is high.
This trade-off between Severity and Priority reminds me of a model a colleague showed me recently. It's called The Priority Matrix, a bi-dimensional model that can be used to prioritize bugs based on how many users it affects and the severity.
 |
| A picture which describes the bi-dimensional Priority Matrix. The Y dimension represents the column with the caption "Users affected" containing the values "one," "some" and "all." The X dimension represents the column with the caption "Severity" containing the values "cosmetic," "inconvenient" and "stops work." The priority of the bug is more or less significant according to the position in the axis. For example, if a bug is cosmetic and affects one user, the priority is 4; if a bug stops somebody's work and affects some users, the priority is 1; if a bug stops somebody else's work and affects all users, it has maximum priority with the value of zero. |
The single duplicate deposit issue described earlier falls into the category of inconvenience that affects one user. Therefore, priority 3.
Not every bug is worth fixing
source: The Problem You Solve Is More Important Than The Code You Write
No comments:
Post a Comment