[ros-dev] Bugzilla interface
Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo
elhoir at gmail.com
Fri Aug 27 17:22:06 UTC 2010
"Or consider a move to fogbugz?
It's not open source"
IMHO if its not open source, its (or should be) automatically discarded
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey at reactos.org> wrote:
> It would be interesting to listen to Amine's and testers (e.g. Olaf and
> Gabriel) opinion regarding these comments, since they deal with it mostly
> every day.
> Aleksey Bragin.
> From: "Timo Kreuzer" <timo.kreuzer at web.de>
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 7:20 PM
> To: "ReactOS Development List" <ros-dev at reactos.org>
> Subject: [ros-dev] Bugzilla interface
>> I'd like to propose an overhaul of our bugzilla interface. The reason is
>> that the current interface is ugly and confusing and I think we can make
>> filing and handling bugs less unenjoyable ;-)
>> First I think it would be very useful, if we could edit the description
>> field of the bugs. This way we don't need to browse through dozens of
>> comments to find all neccessary info, while the description only
>> contains useless stuff. This should be restricted to the original
>> reporter and testers / developers.
>> Then when filing a new bug or looking at a bug that is already filed,
>> the layout is horrible. I'm not a webdesigner, so it's hard for me to
>> say how it should look like, but definately not the way it is. This
>> might be appropriate for projects whose website look like
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/ but I'm sure, we can do better.
>> Then when filing a bug there are the following fields:
>> - reporter - I know who I am, so why show it to me? Unneccessary
>> - Component: I don't think this field is really useful as it is. First:
>> Patches are definately not a component. Then it's often hard to tell
>> where the bug is. for example, if rapps doesn't download anything, is
>> that related to network or is it a kernel bug or win32 or rapps or is
>> only the server down? You often don't know it when filing a bug. Also
>> win32 covers a lot from win32k to shell32, but are these more closely
>> related than drivers and networking?
>> - Severity: while I think this field is useful and important, it should
>> only be editable by testers and developers and should not appear when a
>> bug is filed.
>> - Platform: should be removed
>> - OS: should be removed
>> - AssignTo, Cc: rarely used on first filing, should IMO only be editable
>> by testers / developers
>> - URL: While we use this field from time to time, I think the URL could
>> as well, if neccessary be put into the description field (provided, it
>> was editable). This versatile field should imo change it's purpose from
>> URL to TAG. So we can add different tags, like REGRESSION, PATCH, HACK,
>> that are currently put into the summery field. It could also contain the
>> regression range or guilty version
>> - Alias: we don't use this, or rather currently only misuse this for the
>> guilty version, which is problematic, as soon as 2 bugs have the same
>> guilty version, IMO unneccessary
>> - Summery: should be as wide as the description field
>> - Description: To get better bugreports, I suggest dividing this field
>> into "Steps to reproduce:" "Experienced behaviour:" "Remarks"
>> These fields can very well be automatically merged into one field, It's
>> just to show people that they must provide steps to reproduce, instead
>> of writing dozens of lines about their hardware configuration and how
>> they feel about the bug.
>> Ros-dev mailing list
>> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ros-dev