Hello, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > > Manuel Lemos said at 22:18 6-1-2002: > > >- Assuming that the number of votes may influence in the priority that > >developers will give to fix each bug, it seems easy to mislead > >developers because somebody that realizes that may submit a bunch of > >votes just to make it outstand in the pending bug queue. I suggest that > >you adopt an authentication scheme like bugzilla, that requires > >submitters to subscribe confirming the subscriptions by e-mail. This > >way, multiple votes from the same subscriber would only count as one. > > If you go down that road, instead of assuming mature users, and kicking > out the occasional kid, you'll end up with a lot of maintenance in the > the subscriber database, deleting numerous hotmail accounts.
I think that bug reporters and people that know and understand the point of the bug database are mature users. Bugzilla implements that kind of authentication to avoid reports from faked people that do not intend to provide feedback later. > Floods can be easily detected, and bugs which outstand tremendously can > be investigated. The problem to avoid here are not exactly floods, but the occasional user that in the hope of having his reports addressed with greater priority would submit say like 12 votes. How would you tell if those votes would be from the same user or not? > There's also a much easier authentication for votes, which separates > humans from bots, described here: > http://www.webtechniques.com/archives/2001/12/perl/ Interesting. This would be better than it is now, despite it would not avoid the problem. Regards, Manuel Lemos -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
