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