You're working with a definition of "Zero Bug" that doesn't arise from the meanings of "bug" and "zero" combined together in the obvious, orthogonal way.
There are such compounds entrenched in the English language (like "new wave" or "blackboard") but they take decades to enter general use.
I don't think we need "zero bug" to be a non-compositional compound of this type. The terms "bug" and "zero" are too significant in computing for us to allow them to be hijacked like this.
For instance, we wouldn't redefine "zero latency" as being 5 seconds (say, in a situation in which we can't get it any shorter for the given span, due to the distance and the speed of light). Latency is latency, zero is zero, and five seconds isn't zero.
I urge you to reconsider your use of technical language.
There are such compounds entrenched in the English language (like "new wave" or "blackboard") but they take decades to enter general use.
I don't think we need "zero bug" to be a non-compositional compound of this type. The terms "bug" and "zero" are too significant in computing for us to allow them to be hijacked like this.
For instance, we wouldn't redefine "zero latency" as being 5 seconds (say, in a situation in which we can't get it any shorter for the given span, due to the distance and the speed of light). Latency is latency, zero is zero, and five seconds isn't zero.
I urge you to reconsider your use of technical language.