Hi, On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 09:53:22AM +0200, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: > I believe it is a very bad idea to use that field to show who > should contribute additional information to the bug report, the > "Assigned To" field should remain reserved for the competent person > person who will fix the bug (or at least will manage the fixing), > please also see Bugzilla Help, and I never saw an other usage for > that field (and I saw a lot, you know.)
Assignee is and has always been the guy who "owns" the bug. Thats the guy who needs to take the next action for the bug to be resolved. It doesnt make any difference if that action is changing code, bisecting, designing a new feature or providing additional info. And "fixing the bug" is not the "changing code" part -- that is very easy once the issue is identified. Additionally assigning a NEEDINFO-bug to "competent person who will fix the bug" makes no sense at all -- as long as the bug is NEEDINFO, there is no way to know who that would be. > So I can't see that the new Wiki text describes common sense or > general use, but it defines a new standard. This is how ~every other open source project manages its bugs, so its is only natural to do the same on LibreOffice. Diverting from that standard is want needs justification, not the other way around. Everyting else (like this "infoprovider"-nonsense) will only cause confusion. Dont do things you need to explain, do things that explain themselves. Assigning the bug back to the reporter selfevidently makes clear that he is required to take action to move the bug along. This is how bug tracker users everywhere have been working for ages: - bug needs more info to be solved => assign to reporter - bug is triaged => assign to dev - bug is fixed => assign to QA or reporter for verification - bug is verified => assign to the guy who makes the release for closing when release in the product > c) Generally please do not modify existing proceedings without > discussion, people like me use information in Bugzilla for queries, > and every change breaks those queries and causes additional work > (like this discussion, too) Please dont expect users to do things different then everywhere else because you would need to adjust your queries. > d) IMHO it has become a standard that people add themselves to > "assigned to", this standard would be broken with the proceeding due > to Wiki Its no standard at all, as it is not done like that anywhere else. > So I suggest proceeding: > - only set Status NEEDINFO with text request in comment, but without > assignation to reporter I dont see that vital, but it usually helps to bring the point across (better than any "Dear Reporter" comment, although that helps too). > - if info is required not from reporter ad "infoprovider" key word. No, that would be absolutely useless. This "infoprovider" nonsense is rarely used in bug trackers -- the only major user of this aberration is the Novell bugzilla, all others use the sane workflow above. It is unintuitive and uncommon and would require end users (who are the most likely infoproviders) to read the doc -- which they do not (unlike QA volunteers). In addition it dilutes the clear responsibility of the "assignee" field: The assignee is the current owner of the bug and the guy who is expected to move it along. That usually helps move things along or someone else will pick the bug up. You are risking lots of silent deadlocks of the assignee-thinks-infoprovider-has-to-action- this-and-infoprovider-thinks-assignee-has-to-action-this-kind by this. If there is info needed from someone else than the reporter, it is assigned to that guy. Thats common sense and how it is done everywhere else. If you want to do that different for LibreOffice, you need some serious justification. Needing to adjust queries is not one (we should never have done it like that in the first place). So please revert the wiki again and let LibreOffice handle this like pretty much every other open source project. We should get over that infoprovider-nonsense as quick as possible and good riddance. Best, Bjoern _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
