Well... your wish is my command:
Enjoy... and don't say I didn't give you anything for the holidays!
Loading user information from Channel 9
Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9
Loading user information from MSDN
Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN
Loading Visual Studio Achievements
Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements
We do go a bit faster in real life but not much. We usually triage three times a week (1 hour blocks), and we usually cover ~20 bugs a triage session.
During peak time we tend to meet everyday, and as ZBB approaches we could even impromptu meet every time a bug is opened.
I'm surprised you thought we were spending too much time on each bug. If anything sometimes I feel we spend too little time.
From our perspective Triage is what sets the quality bar across a given product. Does a given bug meet our current bar, does it have reproducible repro steps, is this an instance of a more generic bug, does this really need to be fixed right now, is this a bug at all. What context do we need to add to ensure the dev can be productive right away? Is this a family of bugs, and can we link them together so the dev thinks about the entire family at once, thus not having to consistently context switch… etc etc etc.
Spending a few minutes up front as a group working through these issues saves a bundle of time from a developer perspective since they only look at triaged bugs.
When they look at a bug they know it meets the bar, they have enough information in it to be productive right away, and they don't have to worry about searching all over the place for similar bugs to fix while in this code.
From my perspective this saves time when a dev actually gets the bug. Amortized across all our devs and all the open issues we have, the time spent on triage is minimal and in my opinion very well spent.
But that's just my $.02