Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 23:01:42 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:

Upgrading is on my todo list.  I'll try to get to it soon.


thank you for investigating the possibility. post preview is a 
great feature! ;-)

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 11/2/2016 4:01 PM, Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d wrote:

Upgrading is on my todo list.  I'll try to get to it soon.


Thank you, Brad. Your support of Bugzilla is critically important.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d]

On 11/2/16 2:44 PM, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote:

On Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 12:34:04 UTC, Wyatt wrote:

This was added in Bugzilla 5.0.  We're just running 4.4.2 on issues.d.o.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how easy it is to upgrade...


I believe Brad is using the Debian packaged version, so we'll get it whenever 
it reaches whatever
Debian flavor Brad is running.


Actually, bugzilla is one of the few things that's not from pre-packaged 
installers. :)

I do have some minor modifications that have to be ported over, primarily related to interacting 
with the newsgroups.  I haven't looked at the 4 -> 5 update to see how easily they changes will 
translate.  The 3 -> 4 transition took some re-working due to internal changes in bugzilla.


Upgrading is on my todo list.  I'll try to get to it soon.

Later,
Brad

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 12:34:04 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
This was added in Bugzilla 5.0.  We're just running 4.4.2 on 
issues.d.o.


Unfortunately, I'm not sure how easy it is to upgrade...


I believe Brad is using the Debian packaged version, so we'll get 
it whenever it reaches whatever Debian flavor Brad is running.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Wyatt via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 11:00:58 UTC, Nick Treleaven 
wrote:


One thing I miss is the ability to preview posts on Bugzilla,


This was added in Bugzilla 5.0.  We're just running 4.4.2 on 
issues.d.o.


Unfortunately, I'm not sure how easy it is to upgrade...

-Wyatt

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Nick Treleaven via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 13:04:22 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:

On 10/25/2016 05:17 AM, Jacob wrote:

There's no editing one's
comments so I often see people making multiple posts to 
themselves to
add more information or to correct themselves. That's just a 
minor

issue.


I don't think that's really an issue. Bugzilla sends out 
notification emails. An edit feature would complicate that. 
You'd have to read diffs instead of a human-written correction. 
I think that might be more annoying than having multiple 
comments. If any kind of discussion happens you're going to 
have many comments anyway.


One thing I miss is the ability to preview posts on Bugzilla, 
like our forum software. I know there's not much markup that 
happens for bugzilla posts, but somehow seeing the post rendered 
helps me to think whether I've forgotten anything or need to make 
some edits. Not huge but would be nice.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d]

Am Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:12:54 +
schrieb Jacob :

> That doesn't make the point any less valid. If something is broke 
> you fix it or replace it.

I agree with Vladimir and cannot really understand your urge
to completely replace it. As long as people don't abuse their
editing abilities it can be fine to make a title more
specific, add a tag and so on. And the custom views help in
getting the desired information out of it. It is extremely
flexible in that aspect; more than I would expect from a much
more modern and younger project.

-- 
Marco

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 29 October 2016 at 17:14:20 UTC, Jacob wrote:
Let me rephrase that then, no one does anything about the 
issues.


you are plainly wrong. this is as right as your "noone does 
anything". it is especially fun considering that "ag0aep6g" often 
provides clarifications and further sample minimization for alot 
of bugs (it is alot for one man). and other people watching bugs 
too via rss or email subscriptions. DFeed also reports new bugs 
to IRC, so some IRC people are watching too.


but if what you really complaining about is "bugfix rate"... this 
is completely different thing, and it has nothing to do with bug 
tracking software.


p.s. and "resolution" feature *is* used. Vladimir is right about 
reading manuals.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d]

On 10/29/2016 07:14 PM, Jacob wrote:

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 13:04:22 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:

On 10/25/2016 05:17 AM, Jacob wrote:
I think you're mistaken in thinking that no one looks at issues. I
usually at least glance over newly filed ones, and often check if
they're valid.


Let me rephrase that then, no one does anything about the issues. I look
at a lot of issues to, some that can easily be answered and the issue
closed. But that's the problem, everyone is just an observer and no one
does anything.


Of course, I also close them if they're invalid, add tags, minimize test 
cases. And sometimes I can even just fix the issue. You're very welcome 
to do the same. If you see issues that can be answered and closed, 
please do so. This is a problem of manpower.


That said, if you want to help out, fixing compiler bugs would probably 
be more effective than doing janitor's work on Bugzilla issues. It's 
also a lot harder, as far as I can tell.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Jacob via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 13:04:22 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:

On 10/25/2016 05:17 AM, Jacob wrote:
I think you're mistaken in thinking that no one looks at 
issues. I usually at least glance over newly filed ones, and 
often check if they're valid.


Let me rephrase that then, no one does anything about the issues. 
I look at a lot of issues to, some that can easily be answered 
and the issue closed. But that's the problem, everyone is just an 
observer and no one does anything.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Jacob via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 12:48:48 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
I don't think its state is much worse than that of a typical 
bugtracker for projects of this scale.


What projects are those? For ones of similar size at the very 
least all issues get tagged. There are a bunch of issues that 
have nothing done with them.



Anyways for the site itself, it seems to be lacking features.


It is a standard Bugzilla instance. We do not develop the 
software.


That doesn't make the point any less valid. If something is broke 
you fix it or replace it.


When viewing issues as a list there isn't that much 
information about the issue, other than the summary.


You can create custom views for whatever task you have at hand.


Didn't know that, the setting was buried at the bottom of the 
page past the hundreds of errors.


The "Resolution", only ever seen it as "---", maybe it means 
something for closed issues but I haven't seen any closed 
issues.


If something is unclear, please refer to the Bugzilla manual.


Not unclear so much as the feature is there and is never used.


If it is a bit bigger of an enhancement and needs a DIP to add 
the functionality.


Feature requests that require a DIP do not belong on Buzilla.


Who is to determine that? I see a lot of Buzilla reports that are 
large enhancements that should need a DIP. But they stay as open 
issues flagged enchancement. That's the point. There's no, or at 
least no one does say, this needs a DIP, closes the issue to 
remove it from sight.


TLDR; The issue system in place right now needs to be removed 
and a better system with oversight put in place.


Err, no. Just because you haven't seen a Bugzilla instance 
elsewhere doesn't mean we should replace it. The UI is a bit 
90's, but otherwise it has served us well.


Umm, who said I haven't seen it elsewhere? If a system is 
un-maintainable that doesn't mean it's ok and should just be 
overlooked.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d]

On 10/25/2016 05:17 AM, Jacob wrote:

I sort of feel that issues.dlang.org is an unmaintained mess. Anyone has
access to it every aspect of editing anyone else's issue, so anyone
could be added really without any oversight.


Yet there's very little vandalism going on, aside from the occasional 
spam. We have oversight in the form of people watching every change that 
happens on the bug tracker.



There's no editing one's
comments so I often see people making multiple posts to themselves to
add more information or to correct themselves. That's just a minor
issue.


I don't think that's really an issue. Bugzilla sends out notification 
emails. An edit feature would complicate that. You'd have to read diffs 
instead of a human-written correction. I think that might be more 
annoying than having multiple comments. If any kind of discussion 
happens you're going to have many comments anyway.



There are 16k issues (I'm guessing every ID basically means a
unique issue) for DMD alone.


That's not for dmd alone, it's for all components: dlang.org, dmd, 
druntime, installer, phobos, tools, visuald. The 16000 issues also 
include fixed and otherwise closed ones.


Just dmd has about 3000 open issues at the moment [1]. If we filter out 
enhancements (so we have just actual bugs), the number goes down to 
about 2000 [2]. That's still a lot, but way less than 16000.



It has some issues where an individual made
a comment, no tags or anything was set, and then 2-3 years later its
remained like that til someone reserves it with a change or comment Only
for there only to be that one additional comment then the issue gets
buried for another year or so.


Well, that's because there are not enough people to fix the issues. I 
think especially the compiler team could use more hands.



There are so many like this and it is
unclear what exactly the issue is or what needs to be done with it.


If the issue description is lacking, ask for clarification. If the 
submitter doesn't respond and it's really not clear what the issue is 
about, close it. Leave comments explaining your actions.



Almost every issue is like this as well. There are some discussions in
some of the issues but a lot of the times nothing seems to be done about
them.


Sadly, yeah. But that's not an issue with Bugzilla, but an issue of too 
many bugs for too few developers.



Anyways for the site itself, it seems to be lacking features. When
viewing issues as a list there isn't that much information about the
issue, other than the summary.


You can change the columns by clicking on "change columns" below the list.

[...]

So now there are this many issues and it probably won't be an easy task
to go through all of them and determine which ones are actually valid.


Yeah, one at a time. Baby steps.


To weed out all the issues that can simply be deleted.


I don't think there actually are that many. I would guess that most bugs 
are actually bugs and most enhancement requests probably need a decision 
by Walter or Andrei.



It would be nice
to know what needs to be done for an issue, if it is a small enhancement
and can simply get a PR to add the functionality.


Easy bugs are usually fixed quickly. Maybe there are some (or many) open 
easy bugs, but when someone can figure that they're easy, that person 
can probably also quickly fix them. So there's not really a list of 
simple stuff.


However, Andrei has recently made an effort tagging issues with 
"bootcamp" [3]. He deems those issues to be fit for newcomers to D. But 
they're not necessarily simple. Might be small or medium sized projects 
of themselves.


For enhancements, you might want to get confirmation first that it's 
going to be accepted, before jumping in and implementing them. I.e., you 
need Walter or Andrei on board. There's a keyword for that: 
"preapproved" [4]. The "bootcamp" issues obviously also have been 
approved by Andrei.



If it is a bit bigger
of an enhancement and needs a DIP to add the functionality.


If that's so, I think it gets closed in Bugzilla. At least, that's what 
Andrei has done recently, if I remember correctly.



Or whether
an issue exists and how the issue needs to be handled. Is it a feature
that was implemented incorrectly and needs to be reworked. Or was it
possibly an oversight of a combination of features and a more thought
out solution needs to be created, which might involve something more
extreme as removing a previous feature.


The "severity" field covers this partially:

* enhancement: Not a bug, but a request for an additional feature or such.
* trivial: A bug that should be easy to fix (typos and such).
* minor, normal, major, critical: Greater levels of bugs.
* blocker: Mostly misused as far as I know. Should be blocking a 
release, is often used to indicate that the submitter's work is being 
blocked.

* regression: A new bug in an old feature.

Further than that, the submitter of a bug doesn't usually know how it 
came about. And working 

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 03:17:02 UTC, Jacob wrote:

I sort of feel that issues.dlang.org is an unmaintained mess.


I don't think its state is much worse than that of a typical 
bugtracker for projects of this scale.



Anyways for the site itself, it seems to be lacking features.


It is a standard Bugzilla instance. We do not develop the 
software.


When viewing issues as a list there isn't that much information 
about the issue, other than the summary.


You can create custom views for whatever task you have at hand.

The "Product", completely useless, is D for everything on the 
site essentially.


We do not use many of Bugzilla's features. Support for multiple 
products is one of them. (Also is it lacking features or having 
too many?)


The "Resolution", only ever seen it as "---", maybe it means 
something for closed issues but I haven't seen any closed 
issues.


If something is unclear, please refer to the Bugzilla manual.

There's no, "needs work", or "enhancement" or any other 
description that can add to what the issue is or what it needs 
to have done to it.


The severity field has "enhancement" as an option.

If it is a bit bigger of an enhancement and needs a DIP to add 
the functionality.


Feature requests that require a DIP do not belong on Buzilla.

TLDR; The issue system in place right now needs to be removed 
and a better system with oversight put in place.


Err, no. Just because you haven't seen a Bugzilla instance 
elsewhere doesn't mean we should replace it. The UI is a bit 
90's, but otherwise it has served us well.

Re: State of issues.dlang.org

[Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 03:17:02 UTC, Jacob wrote:

...


1. The vast, vast majority of problems attributed to 
collaboration software are actually the fault of a lack of 
communication skills. This situation is no different. Changing 
the software will not fix any problems in organization or 
curation. Most the features you call useless are not useless in 
of themselves, but are "useless" because people don't use them.


99% of all collaboration could be done in excel if you have good 
communication skills.


2. We don't have the manpower to have a completely curated 
system. Any energy spent curating would be better spent fixing 
bugs.


3. It serves its purpose well in that very bad bugs that are 
reported with detail are fixed quickly.


4. Many people follow the bug feed on the forum, so a bug is 
almost always looked at at least once. Most bugs are usually 
considered not very high in priority, and so it's up to the 
volunteers to come in and fix them. Core team members are focused 
on regressions, new issues, and really bad bugs. Most of them 
don't have time for enhancements.


5. If you see an issue that doesn't have enough detail to be 
fixed, then close it.


6. No one is stopping you from putting together a better idea. I 
look forward to your DIP on the subject.

State of issues.dlang.org

[Jacob via Digitalmars-d]

I sort of feel that issues.dlang.org is an unmaintained mess. 
Anyone has access to it every aspect of editing anyone else's 
issue, so anyone could be added really without any oversight. 
There's no editing one's comments so I often see people making 
multiple posts to themselves to add more information or to 
correct themselves. That's just a minor issue. There are 16k 
issues (I'm guessing every ID basically means a unique issue) for 
DMD alone. It has some issues where an individual made a comment, 
no tags or anything was set, and then 2-3 years later its 
remained like that til someone reserves it with a change or 
comment Only for there only to be that one additional comment 
then the issue gets buried for another year or so. There are so 
many like this and it is unclear what exactly the issue is or 
what needs to be done with it. Almost every issue is like this as 
well. There are some discussions in some of the issues but a lot 
of the times nothing seems to be done about them.


Anyways for the site itself, it seems to be lacking features. 
When viewing issues as a list there isn't that much information 
about the issue, other than the summary. Things that are listed 
with an issue: The ID, it's alright I guess can be useful from 
the list, knowing the issue number to reference it in a pull 
request or other issue. The "Product", completely useless, is D 
for everything on the site essentially. The "Comp", that's fine 
for searching for errors across multiple but kind of useless when 
viewing the issue list for a single project. The "assignee", kind 
of useless and it's never used, only every seen it set to 
"nobody". The "Status", kind of useless don't need to know that 
information, just need to know if it is open or closed and that 
shouldn't really be part of the list ; if I search for issues I 
should just specify if I want them to be open or not. The 
"Resolution", only ever seen it as "---", maybe it means 
something for closed issues but I haven't seen any closed issues. 
So what is the point of the list if it doesn't display any useful 
information. There's no, "needs work", or "enhancement" or any 
other description that can add to what the issue is or what it 
needs to have done to it. When there are 16k+ issues, having 
better information in the list view is desired. To make searching 
for an issue easier, rather than having to click on each one 
individually item to get more information from it. There's no 
lack of space, especially when almost every column could be 
removed for something with more useful information.


So now there are this many issues and it probably won't be an 
easy task to go through all of them and determine which ones are 
actually valid. To weed out all the issues that can simply be 
deleted. It would be nice to know what needs to be done for an 
issue, if it is a small enhancement and can simply get a PR to 
add the functionality. If it is a bit bigger of an enhancement 
and needs a DIP to add the functionality. Or whether an issue 
exists and how the issue needs to be handled. Is it a feature 
that was implemented incorrectly and needs to be reworked. Or was 
it possibly an oversight of a combination of features and a more 
thought out solution needs to be created, which might involve 
something more extreme as removing a previous feature.


Well wrote more than I planned to, didn't re-read it though, 
probably should considering I won't be able to edit it. Oh well.


TLDR; The issue system in place right now needs to be removed and 
a better system with oversight put in place. Rather than the 
wildwest it is now, with no oversight and issues existing for 
years before anyone looks at them. If anyone even ever looks at 
them. Some of them aren't even real issues and they just end up 
clogging the pipes, so to speak.