Hi All,
My little contribution.
I think we are going the wrong way totally.
When the dev-list found gerrit it wasn't quite what they wanted. But
they took it, tweaked it and are now using it, with great success
(afaik). And here we are trying to create something new that stands
between what we have as bugzilla and the ask-site. Why are we trying
to take this hughe detour to get what we want?
I think we need _really need_ our own bugzilla so we can tweak that
install that it suits us better. Then we can make the bugs less
complex and use usefull subcomponents. But then we can also install
plugins we think are usefull. Tweaking bugzilla then so it comes
really close with what we need is better then. Yes this is a road that
needs time invested. But that is also needed for the other road.
Just my €0,02
--
Greetings,
Rob Snelders
On 16-07-13 00:33, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:59:37PM -0400, Robinson Tryon wrote:
I did that and I was told to stop.
One big problem with Ask admins reporting a bug for a user is that the
reporter is....the Ask admin. Do you run OSX 10.7? Do you run Windows
Vista? I don't, so when a dev comes back and asks me for repro steps,
I have to shrug and say "Go talk to user XYZ on the Ask site".... and
as you said, the devs don't use the Ask site!
Yeah, its probably best to suggest users to file a bug and offer to
help them
along on #libreoffice-qa once the bug is triaged roughly. I dont
think we need
to bother with bugs as long as those are obviously not welltriaged.
Another problem is that if they haven't provided enough information,
we can't tag the question as "NEEDINFO" and let the Ask system pester
them for more information (although this would be a *great*
improvement that I'd like to see!)
THB, I did something similar with a question recently: Asked a long idle
incomplete question if there is an update on the missing info and
then closed
it as "outdated" a few days later as there was no reply.
Many/most new users on the Ask site do not read old questions. Of the
small number that do, most of them either know how to file a bug or
learn very quickly. So I don't think that me filing bugs for people
will have much value in leading by example (but I could be wrong...).
Only file bugs for others when you can reproduce the bug. Otherwise
guide them
through filing their bug themselves. This also makes the motivation
for a
reproduction scenario clear to the other guy.
So: Give the people a smooth migration path towards bugzilla and
allow them to
test the waters on askbot, instead of a migration scenario that
requires a
sleep all-in learning curve, which will make a lot of them just
turn away.
It's a novel idea, having people start on Askbot and then having them
learn how to use the bugtracker later, and it's not something I'm
entirely opposed to, but it's a very drastic change to how we've been
using FDO and the Ask site up until now.
Note that experienced users will should be encouraged to stay with
fdo (and
will likely do so all by themselves). So: If you now what bugzilla
is, go with
it, otherwise better stay with askbot. If you have "(experienced users:
bugzilla)" behind on the feedback page, you can hopefully divide the
stream at
that point already successfull as those saying "oh, I know bugzilla"
will go
for it and those who do not will evade "(experienced users:
UNKNOWN_THING)".
Best,
Bjoern
--
--
Greetings,
Rob Snelders
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/