adys.wh at gmail.com
Sat May 2 04:21:01 CDT 2009
Outside Major/Critical/Enhancement, I don't think severity useful, to
be honest. Problem is, more often than not, a minor implementation
glitch can result into an application breaking all around if it relies
on it a lot. Which is pretty much the case with photoshop at the
Maybe it should be renamed to "impact", or something that would
present itself differently to a first-time user. Or add a second
severity field. I don't know, not my call.
2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson <Nicklas.Borjesson at ws.se>:
> Hi all!
> First, I couldn't find any list more suitable than this one to comment the severity levels in the bug reporting so I post it here. If this was a really bad thing to do, please tell me were to do so.
> Secondly, don't take this wrong, I am not here to preach, I actually think this is a serious problem. I am not drunk either. Currently. :-)
> So, with regards to severity levels:
> 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.
> So I would like to introduce a bold new weight into the severity assessment: The user experience. Or at least the bugs' negative impact on it.
> The user experience(UE from here on) is really quite impossible to quantify exactly, luckily that is not usually necessary.
> There are several reasons to incorporate this into the severity classification, but I'll stop at two:
> 1. The ones reporting the bugs will come across with how severe they think the bug is to them.
> Currently, there is far too much of "you've got a almost black screen or black square instead of icons running Photoshop?..hmm that's really trivial...an 'UI glitch', but OK then, I'll mark it minor to be nice to ya."
> To a user, even an advanced one, this must feel like talking to a condescending Martian. Frustrating, if not infuriating.
> Likely, they will never again take the time to make a bug report. It is even quite likely that they will give up their move away from windows.
> 2. Currently, fixing a "trivial" UE-bug can make way more users happy than fixing a "normal" functionality-bug.
> This means that bug fixing is prioritized on a basis other than catering to the users needs. And to me, that's something that really shows.
> Can one defend this without invalidating the wine project?
> It is a serious question, I might have missed something fundamental.
> Anyway, I have some ideas on how to make the severity classifications better(and more intuitive for the mere user), but I won't go in to that now.
> I just want to know if any of you agree with me. Do I make a valid point?
> I repost this since I didn't get any post from the server the first time.
> Also I expect this post to piss some off, which makes it even stranger not to get any replies at all.
> BTW, I also just read in a comment in a bug report that the severity flag doesn't mean much at all when it comes to how a bug is prioritized.
> So the only input the users have on how important a bug is to them is practically ignored? Why have that checkbox then?
> And why make such a big thing of it not being correctly set?
More information about the wine-devel