>> Back in the Template Toolkit days, there was a tag we used in Launchpad that identified bugs we thought should be fixed before removing the old catalog from Evergreen. Maybe we could consider doing something similar for the web client. <<

I like that idea. Although our circulation staff have moved over to the web client for the most part, there are still some major roadblocks that need to be overcome in cataloging before we are able to move everyone over completely.
I like the idea too, but, along with it, there also needs to be a commitment to make sure bugs with those tags get fixed before the old client is removed. IIRC, the old javascript catalog was removed before many of those bugs were fixed because nobody directed their developers, funded development, etc. to get those bugs addressed. I think the tag is a good way to organize the bugs and highlight the important ones, but it doesn't offer a guarantee that they will be fixed without that commitment.

Kathy


On 03/16/2018 04:20 PM, Terran McCanna wrote:
>> Back in the Template Toolkit days, there was a tag we used in Launchpad that identified bugs we thought should be fixed before removing the old catalog from Evergreen. Maybe we could consider doing something similar for the web client. <<

I like that idea. Although our circulation staff have moved over to the web client for the most part, there are still some major roadblocks that need to be overcome in cataloging before we are able to move everyone over completely.

Terran McCanna
PINES Program Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30345
404-235-7138
tmcca...@georgialibraries.org <mailto:tmcca...@georgialibraries.org>


On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Kathy Lussier <kluss...@masslnc.org <mailto:kluss...@masslnc.org>> wrote:

    Hi Diane,

    I'm sorry to hear your frustration, but I can also empathize.
    While working on a recent project to sponsor more bug fixes for
    the web client, I also got discouraged as new bugs were reported,
    particularly when they were ones that would have made our priority
    list if we had known about them at the time we were selecting bugs
    to fix. To keep myself from getting discouraged, I found it helped
    to keep some things in mind.

    - Despite the current open bugs, the web client has come a long
    way just in the past year. Setting aside the addition of serials
    and offline, there has been a lot of bug fixing  over the last
    months. In many cases, the fixes have been for what I consider to
    be showstopper bugs. I continued to see this work even today  as I
    was going through my bug mail. It might be useful for the
    community to track statistics of how many web client bugs are
    getting fixed on a monthly basis to help us see the progress
    that's been done. Looking at the 3.0 point release notes is also a
    good way to see how much work has been done.

    - There were many people, including myself, who spent a lot of
    time testing the web client when the code was initially written,
    but, no matter how much testing was done, we knew that there are
    just some bugs that just won't be found until people start using
    it in production. This isn't unique to Evergreen or open-source
    software, but is something I've seen when using proprietary
    software as well. We tried to catch some of these bugs by having
    2.12 available for trial use in production, but I don't think most
    sites really started using the web client heavily  until 3.0,
    which was just released in October. I would say the flurry of bug
    reporting since that time is an expected part of the process of
    eventually getting to a more stable web client. This is also why
    we are keeping the xul client around through the 3.1 release,
    because we knew it would take time to get the web client to where
    it needs to be for all Evergreen users to move to it.

    I still remember the early days of the Template Toolkit catalog. I
    was equally discouraged about bugs and missing features, but as
    more sites started using it, they made sure features important to
    them were fixed or added, and we now have a stable and feature
    rich public catalog.

    - I'm worried about stating this the wrong way, but we also have
    to remember the number of bugs we've learned to live with under
    the xul client. I'm not saying we should just learn to live with
    the web client bugs, but they certainly are more noticeable now
    because they are new. There are also several xul client bugs we
    were able to close out because they were fixed in the web client.
    The important thing is that the bugs are open and known. Evergreen
    sites can see where the problems are and ultimately choose to
    focus on addressing the ones most important to them.

    Having said all of this, I do think it's important that if there
    are showstopper bugs in the web client (not annoyances, but things
    that really prevent you from using the web client), we need to
    identify those to increase the likelihood that they will be fixed
    ahead of other bugs. For example, one of the groups I work with
    recently set the bug priority to High for a handful of bugs they
    considered to be showstoppers. Back in the Template Toolkit days,
    there was a tag we used in Launchpad that identified bugs we
    thought should be fixed before removing the old catalog from
    Evergreen. Maybe we could consider doing something similar for the
    web client.

    Kathy



    On 03/16/2018 03:27 PM, Diane Disbro wrote:
    Good afternoon -

    I volunteered to keep track of Webby problems for the Missouri
    Evergreen circulation committee. I am pretty discouraged. My
    library began using Webby in December but there were so many
    frustrations that we stopped after about a month. My spreadsheet
    of problems now has thirty-five issue on it. Every time a new bug
    report is sent out my heart sinks.
     Diane Disbro
    Branch Manager/Circulation Coordinator
    Union Branch
    Scenic Regional Library
    308 Hawthorne Drive
    
<https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+%0D%0A+++++++++++++++++++++++++Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
    Union, MO   63084
    
<https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+%0D%0A+++++++++++++++++++++++++Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
    (636) 583-3224 <tel:%28636%29%20583-3224>

-- Kathy Lussier
    Project Coordinator
    Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
    (508) 343-0128 <tel:%28508%29%20343-0128>
    kluss...@masslnc.org <mailto:kluss...@masslnc.org>
    Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier <http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier>



--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
kluss...@masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

Reply via email to