> A start would be if Zarro bugs is the result of a query to ask directly if
> a new bug is wanted and then populate with whatever they've already entered
> in the query.
Most people to whom this would be useful query on two or three words. It's
hardly an effort to get them to type them again in the "New bug" form. And
where would you put them?
Also, if someone comes up "Zarro Boogs" we want them to try a few more
searches - that's what Zarro Boogs means - your bug exists, you just
haven't found it yet ;-)
Asking people who do a failed search explicitly if they want to file a new
bug will lead to more dupes being filed.
> To be honest I think there's too much text in the Bugzilla
> Helper to make it useful but that's an opinion of someone that it isn't
> aimed at.
I can't see how we can reduce the text while still making it
well-explained, but I'm open to suggestions :-)
> For the accurate collection of data I prefer a true interview method, which
> rather than filling in a form would present each question as part of a
> series of dialogs, possibly with a set of forward and backward buttons, but
> modal so that the underlying form variables could be built properly. The
This is bad for several reasons:
a) Requires a complete rewrite
b) Slower for intermediate users
c) Much greater possibility of data loss if the process breaks
> reasonable order and concentrates the user's attention whereas a form
> filling exercise lets the user be lazier or simply miss sections. That
If the user misses important sections Bugzilla Helper already nags them
about it.
> It would be nice that, before the bug was actually added, a search was made
> using their Summary or Description or both to come up with possible
> duplicates as well.
Would this not irritate people who have already done all the searching?
Gerv
