On 23/12/17 12:24, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Forwarded? No way! Same for bugs@ as tech@. It needs manual work to
triage, identify what is a bug, follow up with the reporter to make
sure the report is accurate and has enough information to be useful.
Same whatever the entry point is. If reporters can add bugs to it
directly, they need to go into a triage queue and *not* appear in the
main system until that's done.
The idea of a bug tracking system is to spread the work and help
people remember things. It should *reduce* work done by devs because
they no longer have to drag even the most basic information out
of a reporter and figure out whether it's a bug or user error
or a support request in disguise.
If it means *extra* work for devs, it's not going to work.
I still don't agree with you about maintaining both @tech/@bugs in
correlation with a web interface (bugtracking).
Not a gain, just extra trouble.
What happens in other places is that if a mail comes that looks like a
possible ticket (not resolvable by mail), someone replies and says
"please open bug report in https://...";
so we can track it.
However you 're right with the last paragraph above and it's something I
haven't thought before.
More people might get involved and eventually this might get some work
out of the devs.
G
