Is it a bug? Unintended behavior from agreed specifications [closed]

Question

When the specification and the agreed behavior of the application operates without fault, however the outcome turns out to be undesired, what should this be called? Is it a bug?

How can it be a bug when the software performs as desired from the specifications and the agreed behavior?

Answer 1

I do consider this a bug. In my experience 90% of all bugs* are about not understanding what is wanted: ie. design bugs.

In this case the design itself was buggy leading to a bad specification. The fault here lies not in the person who implemented the program but in the person/team who designed the system in the first place.

In a Scrum setting, I usually consider fixing design bugs as completely new stories since it really results in a new specification (and along with it new tests and new definition of done). I don't consider it a "bugfix" task.

*note: In most modern languages. In C, 90% of all bugs are about bad memory management

Answer 2

Why does it matter how we call it? It looks to me that there is a deeper problem out there where you are - instead of realizing there is work to do and doing it ground is being prepared for blame-laying. This serves no purpose and everyone wastes their time.

I understand the frustration on both sides, but right now what you have to do is a) identify what has to be changed for the software to work as expected (and therefore bring users the benefit they hoped for) and b) do it. Call it a bug or call it a new story - or call it a butterfly if it helps, but move forward.