<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 31, 2016, at 18:22 , Daniel Veditz <<a href="mailto:dveditz@mozilla.com" class="">dveditz@mozilla.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_extra">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Milan Sreckovic <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:msreckovic@mozilla.com" target="_blank" class="">msreckovic@mozilla.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I’m going to start and keep arguing that we do not want to have an explicit name for that largest bucket of “wishlist” bugs, and should instead have it marked by the absence of a tag.</blockquote><div class=""><br class=""><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:tahoma,sans-serif;font-size:small">What distinguishes a bug that has not been triaged from a bug that has been triaged and (mentally?) put into the third bucket if there's no explicit marker?</div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">I understood there was an “untriaged” status set by default.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On the other hand, the latest choice of “backlog” is non-confrontational enough that, for the purposes of the naming discussion, is close enough to “blank" for me not to argue.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">—</div><div class="">- Milan</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></body></html>