Hi everyone, In order to better understand these importances, I will attempt to clarify some of the importances I chose. Hopefully this will lead to a better understanding.
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Brian Curtis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Kiwinote <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 5b. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/530187 >> > I don't understand why you assigned yourself to the bug report here since > Gary Lasker fixed it. > (I did actually fix this one.) > 5c. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497109 >> > Since it's a usability issue, I think this is more of a low importance bug > then medium. > Ok, although usability is something that very much has the focus in software-center. I would have chosen the importance medium because I would not expect an user to find trial software in the 'free software' category. Especially with paid software coming in later versions of software-center, it is a good thing that this bug has been resolved. But indeed this does only affect a small fraction of the packages. > 5d. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/542892 >> > A cosmetic/usability issue that does not limit the functionality of an > application = Low Importance. Not medium > Ok, though this bug does actually break functionality. It means packages like this cannot be installed through software-center. Once again it only affects a small fraction of the packages. > I notice that only two of the above need the desired importance, so here >> are a few more bugs chosen to demonstrate deciding importances. >> - low: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514859, >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/425850 >> - medium: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514874, >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514846 >> - high: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514875, >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/528051 >> > 514875 - you said high, but it's only medium > Don't really agree on this. One very common use case of software-center is to remove software. (Software-center replaces gnome-app-install, which was called "Add/Remove software" in the menu.) In the main menu of software-center there are two items, 'get software' and 'installed software'. If one wants to remove software it is hard to explain why the software isn't listed under 'installed software'. I could agree with this being wishlist though. > 528051 - you said high, but it's only wishlist > Yes, this is a feature request, so strictly speaking it should be wishlist. This feature request is however the only simple way to fix a major issue, namely that 31000 items are being displayed in a list view. Firstly this takes about 8-10 seconds to load, so many users will give up, thinking that software-center has frozen. A small week ago this took about 25 seconds, but recent updates have diminished this time. There is also no way to browse the list as the items are not in a visible alphabetical order (strictly speaking they are in alphabetical order of package name). Scrolling lags significantly. I myself believe that this would be sufficiant reason to set this as high importance rather than wishlist. > 514874 - you said medium, but it's only low > This I could probably agree with. But although it is a minor issue, it does affect all packages in main and restricted. Software-center is giving wrong information in all these cases. I chose medium because although this is a small issue, it is relatively simple to fix, and will benefit all users. > 514846 > This would be similar to the case above. It is very noticeable and makes the difference between a good first impression and a bad one. > low importance bugs > It is probably clear that these are indeed low importance. > Im going to say -1 because you are very close, but there are still things > you should probably improve upon. Don't hesitate to contact me on > #ubuntu-bugs in freenode IRC if you want any help. > Ok, thanks for taking a look. It would be nice to hear from you whether my choices make more sense with detailed explanations though. Looking back over my reasonings and comparing it to wiki/Bugs/Importance I think I can draw a few conclusions. I seem to give an increased importance to bugs that are small, but affect all users. This could be considered in line with the aims of software-center. I am furthermore choosing importances based on the current set of software-center bugs and importances in Launchpad, rather than strictly following the guidelines for importance. I do think that this is better for software-center itself, but can see that it leads to a decrease in consistency throughout Ubuntu. This is a consequence of software-center in Ubuntu being the upstream. Please let me know what you think about this. On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:45 PM, C de-Avillez <[email protected]> wrote: > Kiwinote -- please repropose with a better selection of bugs showing your skills on triage, and I will review it happily. If it is not an issue to reapply straight away, then I will happily try and make a selection that fits the guidelines better. However, I will wait for some responses on the above first. Once again, please feel free to let me know if you disagree with any of the above. Thanks a lot, Kiwinote
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
