A good understanding of the impact of different types of bugs on various project aspects is essential to improve software quality research and practice.
Such models are essential to properly manage the major software development outcomes (e.g., cost, schedule, quality) and to build up organizational knowledge.
An example situation in which such a mapping is necessary is when defect data from a variety of projects is aggregated to build a quality model that relates some characteristics of
software development to resulting quality in terms of defects.
To be effective, however, the models must be built using a significant base of historical
data that describes numerous variations within the domain of the model (e.g., an organizational unit).
To be effective, however, the models must be built using a significant base of historical
data that describes numerous variations within the domain of the model (e.g., an organizational unit).
Some categorizations are orthogonal, i.e., they address different dimensions of interest (e.g., severity vs. technical cause), so combining them results in categories that are not mutually exclusive.
Some categorizations are orthogonal, i.e., they address different dimensions of interest (e.g., severity vs. technical cause), so combining them results in categories that are not mutually exclusive.
So instead one must choose a set of discrete categories and devise mapping rules to convert the data consistently and coherently into the new categories.
The communication activities that follow the initiation time would presumably be less cohesive, and more connected to individual preferences and styles of work.
On the other hand, for the worst case, i.e., the most pessimistic view of the state of the software, we take the highest level of severity between the two responses.
![[PukiWiki]](image/wadanyan.png "[PukiWiki]")
