January 2008 - Wine-Devel - list.winehq.org

Re: bugs audit volunteers required

by James McKenzie

Austin English wrote: > On Dec 31, 2007 6:10 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > >> The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those >> persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should have a bug >> moderation? Only allow bugs that follow the criterion, then have a way >> for bugzilla admins to accept bug reports and then a new bug report >> entry is created in bugzilla. >> >> -Maarten >> > > Does bugzilla support this? How about not allowing someone without > higher bugzilla privileges to reopen bugs? > > It should. Some of the other projects I work on will only allow a person with admin level to change the status of a submitted bug, including re-opening. I would also like to see this with bugzilla, even though I am an ordinary 'user'. This would prevent users from closing a bug report and then opening it again, even if the problem affects a different module. IMHO, these are two separate bugs. James McKenzie

Jan. 1, 2008

Re: appdb license choices unclear

by James McKenzie

Dan Kegel wrote: > This matters sometimes, e.g. when considering which apps to > put in our "must run in 1.0" test suite. > > So it might be good to split freeware into two: > Free to use, but not to share > Free to use and to share > +1 to these categories. James McKenzie

Jan. 1, 2008

Re: bugs audit volunteers required

by James McKenzie

Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Vijay Kiran Kamuju schreef: > >> just like last year we did an audit of all the bugs in bugzilla. >> I think this year also we should do the same, the bugs are growing >> large and older bugs are being neglected. >> just wanted to say that we need to check all the old open bugs, and >> test them/ask the user for status. >> Close the bug as Abandoned if there is no response. also test the >> application yourself on latest git. >> this is the work to be done. and we need volunteers for this work. >> >> need volunteers to clear up the mess(old abandoned bugs) in bugzilla >> > The situation with bugzilla is quite bad. The rate at which bugs are > opened is a LOT higher then the rate of bugs that can be fixed. This > adds a lot of bugs that won't ever be fixed. > There are bugs that are related and these should be linked since the Wine developers have disallowed Metabugs. Thus if a bug is dependent on a fix for .NET 2.0 for example, then the bug should be linked into a report for .NET 2.0 installation not completing. Thus, the reporter is aware that .NET has to be fixed first and then the reported bug can be worked on. > The situation also isn't helped by the fact that a lot of the newly > generated bug reports are not of good enough quality. Example: "My > obscure app doesn't do xxx", without for example mentioning what the app > is, or a link to a demo, or insufficient information to really reproduce > the bug. > I agree. If you cannot find the application or a demo version to work with, how can you fix the bug. Logs and other helpers go a long way. Maybe an intro page as to what is needed and how to get it. This will become more and more critical as the project approaches 'release' status (1.0). Also, marking bugs as having insufficient information to fix advises the reporter that the project needs more information to help or troubleshoot. > The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those > persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should have a bug > moderation? Only allow bugs that follow the criterion, then have a way > for bugzilla admins to accept bug reports and then a new bug report > entry is created in bugzilla. > > This would put a heavy load on the bug admins and actually slow down the process. I work on other projects. Clicking on the "NEW BUG" link should take a person to a web page with reporting criteria. At this point, the reporter will read through a page of what should be done to report a bug. After clicking a 'I read and understand the reporting requirements', then the reporter will be able to submit a bug. After a few cycles of this, regular reporters will not be subject to this page and will be taken instead to the regular bug reporting page. For the occasional reporter, this is a good way to handle bug reports, IMHO. James

Jan. 1, 2008

Re: bugs audit volunteers required

by Austin English

On Dec 31, 2007 5:56 PM, Vijay Kiran Kamuju <infyquest(a)gmail.com> wrote: > We would be doing this for 1-2 months as the Wine 1.0 release might > happen in may be next 6-7 months time. We might expect lotta bugzilla > activity as wine goes out of beta. > and all the old bugs will be ignored and bugs grow exponentially. > There will be lotta bugzilla spam, we cant avoid it ;) > Last time it was mostly done by Jonathan Ernst and others, also by me I've got some spare time/bandwith to do this, but had been holding back to prevent the flood of bugzilla mail. But like you said, this needs to be done before 1.0, so if we're ready to do it now, I'll start triaging a lot more old stuff. I'll wait a day or so to get some more replies before though. On Dec 31, 2007 6:10 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those > persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should have a bug > moderation? Only allow bugs that follow the criterion, then have a way > for bugzilla admins to accept bug reports and then a new bug report > entry is created in bugzilla. > > -Maarten Does bugzilla support this? How about not allowing someone without higher bugzilla privileges to reopen bugs?

Jan. 1, 2008

bugs audit volunteers required

by Vijay Kiran Kamuju

On Dec 31, 2007 6:10 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > Vijay Kiran Kamuju schreef: > > > just like last year we did an audit of all the bugs in bugzilla. > > I think this year also we should do the same, the bugs are growing > > large and older bugs are being neglected. > > just wanted to say that we need to check all the old open bugs, and > > test them/ask the user for status. > > Close the bug as Abandoned if there is no response. also test the > > application yourself on latest git. > > this is the work to be done. and we need volunteers for this work. > > > > need volunteers to clear up the mess(old abandoned bugs) in bugzilla > The situation with bugzilla is quite bad. The rate at which bugs are > opened is a LOT higher then the rate of bugs that can be fixed. This > adds a lot of bugs that won't ever be fixed. > > The situation also isn't helped by the fact that a lot of the newly > generated bug reports are not of good enough quality. Example: "My > obscure app doesn't do xxx", without for example mentioning what the app > is, or a link to a demo, or insufficient information to really reproduce > the bug. I can see the quality of bugs is deteriorating at a fast rate. since it crossed 10K mark. I think we should some things compulsory in the bug reports they are submitting. And we should add a new textbox to bugzilla when creating a new bug. It should be steps to replicate/reproduce the bug. It should be like step1, step 2, .... > > The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those > persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should have a bug > moderation? Only allow bugs that follow the criterion, then have a way > for bugzilla admins to accept bug reports and then a new bug report > entry is created in bugzilla. Bugzilla moderation is an very daunting task. and on top of it verifying the bugs will add to it. Forwarding abandoned patches in bugzila, asking for reasons, put them in bugzilla. And it needs at least 1-2 persons to work on them full time ;) As its an open source project we cant impose have a full time moderators May be we need to think of an alternate solution. Adding new fields to the bugzilla, that I suggested an be another alternative ;) lets think of more alterntives -- VJ > > -Maarten >

Jan. 1, 2008

Re: bugs audit volunteers required

by Maarten Lankhorst

Vijay Kiran Kamuju schreef: > just like last year we did an audit of all the bugs in bugzilla. > I think this year also we should do the same, the bugs are growing > large and older bugs are being neglected. > just wanted to say that we need to check all the old open bugs, and > test them/ask the user for status. > Close the bug as Abandoned if there is no response. also test the > application yourself on latest git. > this is the work to be done. and we need volunteers for this work. > > need volunteers to clear up the mess(old abandoned bugs) in bugzilla The situation with bugzilla is quite bad. The rate at which bugs are opened is a LOT higher then the rate of bugs that can be fixed. This adds a lot of bugs that won't ever be fixed. The situation also isn't helped by the fact that a lot of the newly generated bug reports are not of good enough quality. Example: "My obscure app doesn't do xxx", without for example mentioning what the app is, or a link to a demo, or insufficient information to really reproduce the bug. The situation isn't improved by the fact that bugs are reopened by those persons after minimal additions. Perhaps we should have a bug moderation? Only allow bugs that follow the criterion, then have a way for bugzilla admins to accept bug reports and then a new bug report entry is created in bugzilla. -Maarten

Jan. 1, 2008