I really didn't think this one deserved even my comment, but here goes. 2009/5/3 Austin English <austinengl...@gmail.com>: > 2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson <nicklas.borjes...@ws.se>: >> Current severity levels are perfect for server applications where everything >> is simply about functionality working or not working. >> However, the overwhelming majority of windows applications in general, and >> those being ported through wine in particular are GUI-based, end-user >> applications. >> When it comes to these kinds of applications, in front of which actual >> people sit for hours on end doing actual work, other factors come into play. > > Wine is meant to support _ALL_ windows applications. It doesn't give > priority to 'server' or 'desktop' applications (there is no > difference, really), but instead tries to make all of them work. > > I have a feeling that by 'server' applications, you meant to say 'old > crappy business applications', or something similar, which makes a bit > of sense. Those applications are simple, and don't depend on a large > portion of the Win32 API, which makes them easy to get running.
I have a feeling that by "server" applications, he meant stuff that's not Wine. For me, games and regular applications running in Wine is still "simply about functionality working or not working". It's still a matter of determining how much a bug affects the functionality, whether that's gameplay, graphics, HID responsiveness ... 2009/5/3 Austin English <austinengl...@gmail.com>: > 2009/5/2 Nicklas Börjesson <nicklas.borjes...@ws.se>: >> Not applications, issues. >> My point is that user experience issues gets a lower severity than they >> should. >> Let's take photoshop CS 4 with two old but relevant actual issues as an >> example. >> 1. There is a problem with the text tool functionality, it did not work. >> Everything else works, though. "Text tool" is one tool out of many. "Minor" loss of functionality. "Normal" at worst. >> 2. There are serious graphics problems, huge artifacts, the entire >> application is almost unworkable under Gnome. If it's restricted to a small number of applications, "Normal". If it's a reasonably large number, "Major". Regardless of what you might think, it's not JUST a "UI glitch" if it seriously impairs functionality. Even the use of the word "serious" in your description implies it's more than a "Minor" bug. >> With the current severity levels(without common sense), example 1 gets >> higher priority, which I think is wrong. Without common sense, all bug reports would be "Enhancement" requests, or "Critical", depending on how arrogant the reporter is. Common sense must *always* be applied. > The problem is, however, that many of those problems only break an > application or two. What is a blocker for Photoshop isn't a blocker > for World of Warcraft or Microsoft Office, for example. Hence the bug is "Normal" and not "Major". > Please bottom post on wine mailing lists. Oh, and use "Reply to all" so you stop just hitting Austin with responses! 2009/5/3 Rosanne DiMesio <dime...@earthlink.net>: > On Sat, 2 May 2009 21:08:23 +0200 > Nicklas Börjesson <nicklas.borjes...@ws.se> wrote: >> Non-technical? Posting on and following the wine-devel list? Severity levels >> perfectly clear? >> I must say, you've got some serious credibility issues.. :-) Rosanne is an AppDB admin. What contribution have you made to Wine? Out of you and her, I don't think her credibility can be called in to question. And before you ask, I'm also an AppDB admin, I package the Debian packages for WineHQ, and have had a patch committed to Wine. I'll even send you the git revision code if you can't find it! :D Note that like Rosanne, even when I was a newbie submitting bug reports, I understood the severity levels because I read the descriptions. The descriptions are fine as is, with the possible exception of "Blocker" (people submit "Blocker" bugs for "Normal" issues because it blocks the thing that they're doing).
