Subject: Re: OT: (free) incident managment system opinions?
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 21:40:22 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
Fred Gilham  <> wrote:
| David Golden <> writes:
| > jmckitrick wrote:
| >> The official term is 'incident' but what it really means is bugs
| >> and/or feature requests.
| >
| > Some sort of corpie-speak? Sigh. Weird, though. Usually people try to
| > downplay bugs, calling them "issues" or "variances". ...
| Someone once argued that calling something a "bug" downplays it,
| and that people should call such things "errors".

ISTR that Tom DeMarco[1] suggesting that "bugs" implied something
cute, small, and unimportant, and that they should be called "defects"
that are the responsibility of the person or group "that put them
into the code" [as opposed to "a bug that just crawled into the code
when we weren't looking, honest!"].

And <> has this "See also":

    * ISO 9126, which classifies a bug as either a defect or a nonconformity


[1] DeMarco, Tom. "Controlling Software Projects: Management,
    Measurement and Estimation", (Prentice Hall, 1986) ISBN 0131717111.

Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607