On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 06:23:39PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 07:05:20PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Maybe we need a bit more polish, but probably not worth it to spend too > > much time on the exact feature list. If we spot serious gaps we can always > > add more. And remove old ones which have gone out of favour (having that > > script handy somewhere would be good). > > That's the big one where just being strict about using summary keywords > pays off - flexibility. From pov, I like the summary keywords as that is > shown in the search window - so if custom fields are introduced, I want > them visible in the results list.
Yeah visibility in search results was my big concern too. That's why I asked Ander to merge the 3 areas into one, since otherwise the search result page looks super wasteful. It can be shown by just adding more default fields. Flexibility is another one, but the problem we have with rotating different people through bug duty is that without a list we don't have that consistency - heck even QA engineers fail to be consistent with platform tags. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
