We were having a debate earlier about what to do with open defects after a user story is accepted. Defects are opened under the user story. Our "definition of done" is that a user story is developed and tested with no high or critical defects. Low defects are "ok" and would not prevent the US from being accepted/done and from being deployed.
Some of the team was arguing that those low defects just remain tied to the user story. Others argued that once the user story is accepted and considered "done" that those low defects should be moved out - either to another user story "bucket" (ie a defect bucket) or converted to user stories. In either of these latter cases though we would need to document where the defect originally came from, etc so that we would still have history and acceptance criteria, etc.
Just curious how others handle defects still open under a user story once the user story is accepted.
In my case, if the defect was not important enough to keep the story from being accepted, then it can be closed. The Product Owner accepted the User Story as demonstrated so the defect is not a defect if the PO doesn't agree (tacit accpetance). On the other hand, I would have negotiated with the PO to determine what to do with those defects. The PO may elect to put them in the backlog, in which case they get converted to user stories and placed in the product backlog. Or, the PO may agree with my original statement - they are insignificant and the product can live without them.