Hi, Moriel. Well, I see your point, but I still think it should be done. You spoke about do this, do that, and I told, in one of the paragraphs, about the case it isn't possible to reproduce the bug. So that what I suggest. Let's decide that my proposition isn't rejected yet, but just stalled. I'll search for a good example or examples, in a day or a year, and then answer again in this thread. Maybe that will convince you. Or me. Thank you very much for now, Igal
On Sep 24, 2017 12:10, "Moriel Schottlender" <[email protected]> wrote: I see your idea here, Igal, but I don't think it's necessary. Developers usually have pretty good tools to see where a bug came from (for example, we have a tool called "git bisect"[1] that allows us to analyze not just which release the bug was introduced in, but a specific commit to "blame" for the change. We use it rarely, though, because usually a ticket with good information about the bug is enough. If you report a bug telling us what browser you've used, what you did, precisely (clicked on X, opened Y, looked at feature Z, typed A, etc etc) and where (what page, what wiki, etc) then we usually are pretty good at pinpointing the issue, and if we're not, we tend to know what to look for and ask the user for more information. When we run into trouble understanding a bug, it is rarely due to knowing whether it is the new release or not. It's usually other factors that are (usually) a lot more important for us to know, like any gadgets that a user has, or some browser extension, or some edge case we need to figure out how to reach. From my experience (and I think, from the comments on the thread, from other devs experiences too) the "which release this came from" is less of an issue. I think having another wiki to maintain versions for (there's still a cost for this in terms of maintenance and time, etc) is unnecessary for these points you raise... Did you encounter specific times where a developer couldn't figure out a bug because they didn't know whether it was old or new? It might be that the issue has a different cause, and we can tackle this challenge differently for a good solution. [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:29 AM, יגאל חיטרון <[email protected]> wrote: > The purpose is to say to developers if it's a new problem, or isn't. I can > think about six benefits: > 1) It can save them the time for checking this. > 2) It can be made better by task filer than by developer, because the first > knows better the problem. > 3) It can save the time needed to them or other to find duplicate task, > because there are less tasks to check, only from the last week. > 4) There are many cases when the filer have no way to give an instruction > to reproduce the bug, does not succeed to create such an instruction, or > the developer does not succeed to reproduce it. If the developer will know > that the bug is new, it will be much easier to they to recognize the > problem, or find the right way for reproduction. > 5) Groups 0-1-2 are done (also) exactly for this. New wiki will just give 5 > times more time to see the bugs, which not always come in the first day > only. > 6) If there is some new bug that wasn't found on groups 0-1, but was found, > say, by enwiki user - and most of not tech users is there - they have not > another day to compare, as previous groups do. > About logs - I don't talk about extremally techs users, almost developers, > that can do all the research work by themselves, but about the most of > them. > Igal > > > On Sep 22, 2017 11:34, "Eran Rosenthal" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If you don't have access to old mediawiki version (whether it is group2, > > your own wiki or test3wiki suggested above), > > and suspects there is a regression of something that was working in the > > past, > > it is useful to indicate it in the bug description, and the maintainer of > > that feature can check it out > > (either by indications from git log with relevant commit messages, or by > > restoring to older code) > > > > You can also go over the commits log using web interface: > > https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki/commits/master > > and as Niharika said there are a lot of new changes :) > > While this is static (compared to running mediawiki instance) it as its > own > > advantages: > > You can find out who is the owner (blame), related bugs (usually "Bug: X" > > in commit message) etc > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Niharika Kohli <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > When filing a phab task with some new bug, > > > > you always want to know - is it really new, or I just did not pay > > > attention > > > > to it before? > > > > > > What's the purpose of this information? If it's a bug, new or not, a > > ticket > > > needs to be filed. > > > > > > And when I do know it's a new bug, I can open both versions > > > > in the same time, and compare the behaviour for this bug. And also, > > > compare > > > > the console results - what exactly changed in html, in css, in js > > > commands > > > > reactions. > > > > > > I agree that information will save some developer time but at the same > > time > > > this information is not so easy to gather. This is helpful when the > users > > > have some working knowledge of how developer tools work and how to > > compare > > > file changes. Usually in each version there are a lot of new changes. > > Often > > > it's not easy for developers even to find out what could be causing the > > > bug. > > > > > > I can easily imagine such a wiki quickly falling into disuse. > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 7:29 PM, יגאל חיטרון <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > It can work. But another Monday. I mean, if Tue-Wed-Thu there is a > > > > deployment of version ....5, a day before, Mon there is a deployment > of > > > > version ....4, so starting from tomorrow, group 0 will get a way to > > see > > > > both version, exactly from the beginning, but not until the end, for > 6 > > > > days, group 1 for 5 days, and group 2 for 4 days. And from Monday to > > the > > > > deployment, 1-2-3 days, there will not be use of this. I'll be very > > glad > > > if > > > > it will be decided to do this, and if so, it will be a good thing to > > add > > > to > > > > the text of how to report a bug in phabricator help, something about, > > you > > > > can check if it is a regression, the last version "falt", by > comparing > > > with > > > > this new wiki. I can thing about many dozens of tasks I wrote and > read > > > > where this information could be useful, if added at the first place. > > Hope > > > > you decide this indeed. Thank you very much, > > > > Igal > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 22, 2017 05:17, "Chad" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > No non-emergency deployments on Fridays, Saturdays or Sundays. > > > > > Monday could work. > > > > > > > > > > -Chad > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 7:15 PM יגאל חיטרון <[email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I glad you say so. What about Friday? > > > > > > Igal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 22, 2017 05:07, "Chad" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > It wouldn't be hard to do at all, technically. I imagine it'd > be > > > > > > something > > > > > > > like a test3wiki. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Main thing to know is when do we cycle off of the old version? > > When > > > > the > > > > > > > version goes out on Tuesdays? That day's already pretty loaded > > for > > > > > > software > > > > > > > moving about... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Chad > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:25 PM Brian Wolff <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Making your case here is probably best. The release > engineering > > > > team > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > the people you probably have to convince, although of course > > > anyone > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > potentially create such a wiki, in an unofficial way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep in mind that keeping an older version of the software > > > running > > > > > does > > > > > > > > introduce a maintinance burden, so you will probably have to > > > > convince > > > > > > > > people that it would be regularly useful and not just useful > > this > > > > one > > > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > bawolff > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 21, 2017, יגאל חיטרון < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thank you. Sorry to hear this. Is there some place I can > > > suggest > > > > > this > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > explain why do I think it can be very helpful? > > > > > > > > > Igal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 21, 2017 22:12, "Brian Wolff" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thursday, September 21, 2017, יגאל חיטרון < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > Hi. Sometimes after the week deployment I need to > compare > > > the > > > > > new > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > >> > with the previous one, in some aspect. Is there a test > > wiki > > > > that > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > >> has > > > > > > > > >> > one version before the current? > > > > > > > > >> > Thank you. > > > > > > > > >> > Igal (User:IKhitron) > > > > > > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > >> > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > > >> > [email protected] > > > > > > > > >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> No there is not. You can of course download old versions > of > > > the > > > > > > > software > > > > > > > > >> and setup your own wiki but that is a lot of effort. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > > >> bawolff > > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > >> Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > > > > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Niharika > > > Software Engineer > > > Community Tech > > > Wikimedia Foundation > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- No trees were harmed in the creation of this post. But billions of electrons, photons, and electromagnetic waves were terribly inconvenienced during its transmission! _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
