On 01/20/2012 12:45 PM, Austin English wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:04, Dmitry Timoshkov<[email protected]> wrote:
Henri Verbeet<[email protected]> wrote:
On 20 January 2012 17:25, Dmitry Timoshkov<[email protected]> wrote:
If the problem is sound related there are usually some known words in
the summary line describing the problem, why not search for them? Why
do you think inventing a new keyword and adding it to the buch of bugs
is easier that correctly formulate the problem using right words in
the summary?
Well, at least searching is easier for a well defined keyword than for
a free form summary line. With a keyword you wouldn't have to take
into account differences in formulation like e.g. "audio" vs. "sound".
Well, it's not that hard to have an agreement what "right" words to use.
A person able to add a keyword also should be able to correct the summary
according to "established standards".
That aside, it does seem to me that there's some overlap in
functionality between keywords and components. I'm not quite sure how
other people use the component field, but maybe we don't need both.
Somewhat related, is it really useful to make the distinction between
mmdevapi, winmm, dsound, etc. if it's mostly the same people working
on those, and you practically need to debug a bug first before you can
make that distinction anyway?
It's easier for simple cases like crashes or regressions to set the component,
and I agree that adding keywords duplicating components should be discouraged,
and 'printing' is among of them.
I'd be okay with removing printing, the component will obviously be
wineps.drv or gdi32 for any printing bug (besides there aren't all
that many printing bugs, and it's not seeing much activity).
IMHO, it should be an additional component sound-general, or sound-unknown,
or better yet "unknown-sound". There are many areas like that, that require
investigation by a person with knowledge of said area to properly set component.
With Wine growing we can't require every developer to peruse all bugs in
bugzilla all the time. And searching for some specific bugs by their subject
almost never returns correct component. Case in point - right now we have
4468 bugs assigned to the unknown component. How many people actually go
over those in attempt to investigate and set correct component?
While keywords & components overlap, more generic components will not
overlap with specific ones. And if we name all of them "unknown-something"
that will help user / bugzilla triage people to pick closer area for SMEs to
do more detailed investigation.
To begin with I propose to create following components:
unknown-browser
unknown-core
unknown-d3d
unknown-gui
unknown-input
unknown-printing
unknown-sound
Probably forgot a few.
For triagers reassign bugs to area that looks close to the problem, unless
exact issue is known. For SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) to look through bugs
in their general area and reassign to more appropriate component.
Vitaliy.
