bug status "triaged" is ambiguous

[DarkStarSword]

This bug refers to launchpad itself - but I can't select that as a package.
I've been trying to figure out the meaning of the bug status "triaged" for the last 20 minutes and it occurs to me that if I'm having this difficulty understanding it's meaning, I'm almost certainly not alone. What the hell does it mean when a bug is marked as "triaged"? I seem to be seeing "triage" defined as the process of sorting patients... right... into what exactly? Does it mean "low priority" or simply "I've determined what priority this patient is"? Seems to me that it could mean high priority equally as much as low priority. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage doesn't help - it seems to take "triage" to mean "to sort" and doesn't mention "triaged" at all, except for "untriaged bugs", which I assume means unsorted bugs - so WHAT is a "triaged" bug? Maybe I'm missing some critical English definitions that everyone else knows and takes for granted --- but I doubt it. I'm in favour for picking a less ambigous term for describing ... whatever this term actually means.

[DarkStarSword (darkstarsword)]

Ok, I've had a thought that this probably means that a priority has been assigned to the bug (fair enough, makes sense), and maybe I was a little too drunk (never good) when submitting the original bug to realise it then. I'm still very much against using such a rare word though - see for example bug #204534 where one of the comments is "Will this ever get fixed or is it just triaged (do it yourself)?" --- "do it yourself"?? Sounds like I'm not the only one not clear on the meaning. I propose replacing this term with "prioritised" or "priority assigned" - something that clearly defines itself rather than [potentially] wasting an hour per person before realising the meaning.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

"triaged" means that it is a valid bug, it has been properly prioritised and it has all the neccessary information for an actual developer to look at it.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

I don't know if this is actually explained anywhere other than http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs I didn't see anything on help.launchpad.net

[ramas (slocascio)]

Could the term "Analyzed" instead of "Triaged" better describe this issue status?

[Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)]

"Analyzed" would be less misleading, in that it would no longer suggest it had anything to do with triage. However, it still wouldn't be obvious when or why to use it.

[Jonathan Michalon (johndescs)]

I agree that "Triaged" is not the best term. A non-native (like me) may not know what it means.
Dean Sas said:
"triaged" means that it is a valid bug
Why not merely "valid" then? It is much more known and means what should be, isn't it?

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

johndescs wrote:
> Dean Sas said:
> "triaged" means that it is a valid bug
> Why not merely "valid" then? It is much more known and means what should be, isn't it?

You missed off the rest of my sentence, it's more than just being a
valid bug, it's valid, plus "it has been properly prioritised and it has
all the neccessary information for an actual developer to look at it."

[Milan Knizek (knizek)]

I wondered what "triaged" means, too. Google provided the answer:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/triage

[Jonathan Michalon (johndescs)]

Dean Sas a écrit :
> johndescs wrote:
>> Dean Sas said:
>> "triaged" means that it is a valid bug
>> Why not merely "valid" then? It is much more known and means what should be, isn't it?
>
> You missed off the rest of my sentence, it's more than just being a
> valid bug, it's valid, plus "it has been properly prioritised and it has
> all the necessary information for an actual developer to look at it."
>

Yes, I've not quoted the whole sentence. The reason is I'm not sure what to
think about the rest of it because there are bugs without priority or importance
and with no more than "Triaged" said. In addition I thought that the fact of
containing all informations needed for developers was included in being a valid bug…
Sorry if I missed something more.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

johndescs wrote:
> In addition I thought that the fact of containing all informations
> needed for developers was included in being a valid bug…

By valid bug I meant it is actually a bug and not someone
mis-configuring an application or something.

[Keith Worrell (keith-penguin)]

Well, looking at the list it is between 'confirmed', and 'in progress'. So While I can't think of a word in particular to mean that, it seems self explanatory.

[Nido Media (nido)]

I'd guess the problem is not so much the status itself, but rather the lack of explanation to go with it. The definition as given in dictionaries is ambiguous enough to apply to several parts of the bug reporting process. One can consider a way of incorporating a <DFN> tag or something to go along with the bug status explaining its meaning within the launchpad interface.

[Martin Pool (mbp)]

I think it adds more confusion that meaning and in Bazaar we just don't use it.

I think the closest word for the intended meaning is "Accepted" - I've seen at least one other tracker to use that to mean "the team accepts that this is a bug and they will eventually fix it." It is possible (but maybe rare) that there are widely confirmed bugs that the team does not accept. It's also a bit like "ready to code" - all the data is there to start fixing it.

However I think this is only weakly related to status and more strongly related to other things.

Launchpad already has access control on the targeting and priority fields, so the team can more clearly express their intention to fix the bug, or not, at that level. This intention then remains even if the bug changes status to be incomplete or reopened.

Also, contentious bugs, which seem to be the only place where this matters, already flap between being wontfix/confirmed/invalid/etc. So having only one status that the team can set doesn't seem to help.

If you want a 'ready to code' concept for bugs that need no more discussion that seems better done by a tag.

[Lucio Crusca (lucrus)]

I've also had the same problems in understanding the meaning of "triaged", so this launchpad bug is actually a bug, the report has enough informations and developers can assign it a priority (most probably wishlist).

I'm afraid it's time to change this bug status into "triaged"... :D

[Chetan Crasta (chetancrasta)]

I had to spend 15 minutes Googling to find out the meaning of Triage.
This page explains the meaning: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Status
A little more information is available here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage

I think "Accepted" would be a more meaningful term.
Also, it would help if someone from UbuntuBugControl makes a wikipedia entry for Triage (software).

[Willie Gillespie (wgillespie)]

I also spent the last 15 minutes trying to figure out what "Triaged" meant (not the word, but in the context of Launchpad). I understand now how it is meant to be used, but I agree that it should maybe be relabeled as "Ready to Code" or "Developer Confirmed" or "Officially Confirmed".

After all, it can only be set by accredited individuals... so I think the wording could be modified to be more clear.

[Phill Whiteside (phillw)]

Hmmm, 'triaged' When I was in IT Support, it would be described as 'passed to 2nd level support for further investigation' thus letting the OP know that a) there is no quick fix, b) It's being investigated. JMHO.

[Eleanor Berger (intellectronica)]

The term 'Triaged' may be ambiguous in the broad use of language (almost all words, including 'yes' and 'no', are ambiguous in some contexts) but it has a unique meaning within the context of the Launchpad bug tracker.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

Tom Berger wrote:
> The term 'Triaged' may be ambiguous in the broad use of language (almost
> all words, including 'yes' and 'no', are ambiguous in some contexts) but
> it has a unique meaning within the context of the Launchpad bug tracker.

It does seem that people think that that unique meaning isn't explained
clearly and visibly though.

[Jv (jv-ravichandran)]

Yes, the term Triaged has an air of suspense about it. I guess "Bug Confirmed" or "Confirmed Bug" would be simpler!

[Zeno Gantner (zeno-gantner)]

I think this page describes the meaning of "triaged" in the context of Launchpad:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Status

Even if there is a place where "Triaged" is defined, the term still has the problem that it is not easily understandable what is exactly meant.

One problem is that "confirmed" may sound stronger, even though it refers actually to an earlier stage of the bug lifecycle.
I am not sure though, as I am not a native speaker.
On the other hand, this is an international project, and there are many non-native speakers participating.

Martin (see above) suggested "Accepted", which IMHO is clearer than "triaged", stronger and more official-sounding than "confirmed", so this may be a solution that avoids ambiguities.

[Francesco Pretto (ceztko)]

Actually the real problem with the term "triaged" is that is hard to find in online vocabularies, and the problem is more serious for non english speaking people.

I think "diagnosed" would be more appropriate. It would mean:
- The bug is confirmed;
- It's clear where the bug is;
- It's clear how to fix it;
- It will be fixed, soon or later.

[mlg7 (mlg7)]

Folks, the term "triaged" IS unclear. It is no more clear than "status 18ah-5dgq-o983-5hja", equally unique and misleading.
It is good that google finds this thread, though...
just my +1.

[Johannes Bauer (jb-imm)]

Just another comment, although this one is already marked "invalid". I just had a Launchpad bug classified "Triaged". Since I didn't know what it meant, I needed to google. Searching through dictionaries was not very enlightening ("hospital", etc.). I just didn't know what the status was. Then I asked google. And just for fun, here are the results:

1. Wikipedia (German), no help
2. Wikipedia (English), no help
3 + 4. TheFreeDictionary, no help
5. This bug (solution found)