On Tuesday 21 March 2006 13:58, Ross Johnson wrote: > One thing is for sure though - providing a good problem description, > clear reproducible steps and a sample test case will usually get your > report confirmed by the QA people more quickly, and that means a > developer will see it sooner. Beyond that I can't say.
The difficulty is getting a good problem description. In my experience, most users of any product need a special mindset to give such a description, and if you ask two users to describe the same bug, you'll get two very different answers. In our case, we are expecting them to know how to describe something remotely. If I was talking to someone about an issue, I would try to establish: 1. What did you do to create the error? 2. What happened when you did that? 3. What did you expect to happen? This last one is important because it can often cause the user to question their own assumptions and realise the problem for themselves. Not always, certainly, but it may reduce the noise. So I wonder whether instead of a single box for a description, we should divide it into three questions as above. Or perhaps just prime the box with three questions in it already. I've never seen this tried, so I have no idea how it would be received. One trivial thing though would be to reverse the version list so the most recent are at the top (at least for Writer you've got to scroll down to the bottom to find the most recent version). -- Andy Pepperdine On this mailing list help is provided by volunteers. Please subscribe to the mailing list to see all the replies to a query, and reply only to the mailing list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] For FAQ, userguide, see: http://documentation.openoffice.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
