On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:01 AM Nate Graham wrote:
>
> From the perspective of someone who triages non-Krita bugs, I would say that
> the template has been a big success. My observations (again, for non-Krita
> bugs) are as follows:
>
> 1. Technically adept users are now filing better bugs,
On dinsdag 23 oktober 2018 23:01:21 CEST Nate Graham wrote:
> I understand that this has not been the experience for Krita's bug triagers
> because parts of the template assumes Plasma, and perhaps Krita has a
> larger-than-average percentage of users who fall under category 3. What
> this really
>From the perspective of someone who triages non-Krita bugs, I would say that
>the template has been a big success. My observations (again, for non-Krita
>bugs) are as follows:
1. Technically adept users are now filing better bugs, because they are
faithfully filling out the template with
On maandag 8 oktober 2018 21:10:44 CEST Andrew Crouthamel wrote:
>
> If someone doesn't want to fill out everything, they don't have to. I've
> seen plenty of people deleting some of the template or not filling out some
> fields.
>
There's another problem: the template assumes people are using
On maandag 8 oktober 2018 21:10:44 CEST Andrew Crouthamel wrote:
>
> We had this previously, where the details were added in without any template
> and the bug reports were very lacking, always requiring follow-up work. The
> current template is at least producing bugs with higher quality
>
