Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany wrote:
Hi Philipp,
There's a keyword "valgrind"
(http://www.openoffice.org/issues/describekeywords.cgi), which already
captures this information - IMO duplicating this information in the
summary is prone to errors, and should be avoided.
Since leaving "Valgrind" out of the summary would leave titles like
"ID:23" i strongly oppose simply leaving it.
The complete naming scheme isn't explained in the Wiki, so I didn't now
it's a mere ID then.
My objection is against using the summary to classify issues (and to me
it sounded / still sounds as if this is the main use of the "Valgrind"
in the summary), since this is error-prone. There are other means for
classifying issues, namely keywords.
Since "Stacktrace ID:x"
seems to work well for stacktraces,
Bad example, since stack traces are not submitted in IssueZilla, but in
the Sun-internal bug tracking system (to respect user privacy), and this
system doesn't know other means for issue classification.
Not so bad example, since the current version of Valgrind tasks is
handled the same way. I guess this whole issue only crept up since
Nikolai wants to move this to IssueZilla tasks as there are no privacy
issues involved in tasks created by an automated tool. Still i want to
be able to see from the title what an issue is generally about. A tool
can never know that, so at least the valgrind title tells me what class
of issues this belongs to.
why not stay with "Valgrind ID:x"
for the valgrind bugs ? What naming scheme would you propose instead ?
Do Valgrind bugs really have an ID? (I mean, except the issue ID)?
Aren't they defined by a test case, not by an ID?
"Die normative Kraft des Faktischen" ist da am Werk. Already existing
tasks tell us that currently they have an ID. Since the valgrind tasks
are mostly related to a set of test cases of unknown size, this is also
not a good criterium for the title.
I suggest having the "Error type" or "Error text" (which according to
the Wiki are in the issue description) as summary, since this better
describes what's going on than "Valgrind ID:x". We could enhance this
with the file name where the error occurs, or things like this.
Everything allows you to grasp an idea of the issue just from reading
the summary.
This would be what ? There is no direct relation between any test case
basic line and the valgrind output AFAIK, what would be the "Error text"
in your opinion ?
Kind regards, pl
--
If you give someone a program, you will frustrate them for a day;
if you teach them how to program, you will frustrate them for a lifetime.
-- Author unknown
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
