I would like to share my perspective on the process of creating defects at the sub-task level.
It has been requested that defects be created at this sub-task level; however, I have a different preference. Instead of categorizing defects as sub-tasks, I believe it is more effective to classify them as Bugs and include a field that specifies the environment level. This approach will provide valuable information for the development process, particularly regarding the locations where error codes were discovered.
Furthermore, I recommend linking a Bug to a Story to indicate that it "blocks" the delivery of that Story. Utilizing Issue Links is beneficial as it clearly demonstrates that while a Bug may be a dependency for a Story, the work involved in analyzing, fixing, and resolving the Bug remains separate.
This separation allows for distinct delivery based on priority or severity. For instance, a Story can be completed even if it has a minor defect, whereas a production bug may not always be addressed immediately. I also find it advantageous to track Bugs and Stories concurrently on a board, as the Issue Link effectively treats the Bug as a "sibling" of the Story.
I also think that will allow better reporting without complex filters in native dashboards or EasyBi.
I firmly believe that using Subtasks with “defects” name is not the correct approach and can lead to a complex reporting environment. I would greatly appreciate hearing your opinions and observations to help me make the most informed decision regarding this matter. Additionally, I think it would be beneficial for my team to understand the reasons why using subtasks may not be the best strategy.
