Hi Thorsten,
thanks for writing,
Thorsten Behrens wrote (7-10-2009 11:23)
Cor Nouws wrote:
But since appr. 35% of entered issues is not correct (duplicate,
invalid, works for me, wontfix)(*) I doubt that making it more easy to
enter issues really will help the project.
[...]
Hi Cor,
I concur with Patrick & others that artificially limiting the inflow
of bugs by making the issue tracker unattractive (if you meant that)
... making it specially unattractive :-)
is definitely not the right way to handle the problem of too many
bugs.
I agree. And I would not mind if it was easier to work with.
But ... are there good examples / ideas, that do not have the drawback I
mentioned?
May be divided in two categories:
- within the current infrastructure
- outside that.
Others already commented on the duplicates, and how a more usable
tracker UI would help there;
I saw someone writing that, but I am not convinced.
"works for me" is often a problem of
environment, and not necessarily _not_ a bug - and especially
more or less ..
"wontfix" should _not_ be regarded as something invalid, or
incorrect, but as a conflicting need, or different requirement
towards OOo. Also nothing I'd want to miss, in general.
yes, that is true.
That leaves "invalid" bugs - I find a ~10% loss rate on the inflow
quite acceptable, given how complex OOo is.
duplicate is not invalid, but not valid as well.
But I see, somewhere in your lines above, 'UI'. I did not think along
that line, but had the idea people request a whole new tracker system ...
An more simple IU for quick search, would make it easier to use, yes.
And than a correct summary would also help ;-) I regularly have dups
because the summary is not complete/vague.
Hmm, tbc?
Cor
--
Cor Nouws
- nl.OpenOffice.org marketing contact
- Community Contributor Representative in the Community Council
Gevoel niet vrij te zijn? Zie www.nieuwsteversie.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
