<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 11/4/10 4:03 PM, Tom Spear wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTimqvrDy=kn206MAK6LKA+JF59wL-0WGHzt5hWea@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Dmitry
Timoshkov <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:dmitry@codeweavers.com" target="_blank">dmitry@codeweavers.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>Yaron Shahrabani <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:sh.yaron@gmail.com" target="_blank">sh.yaron@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> I think that voting for bugs is a great feature,
otherwise there would have<br>
> been many annoying comments like: it happens to me too
and what info you can<br>
> get out of it?<br>
<br>
</div>
Adding such a comment is pefectly acceptable.<br>
<br>
Confirming a bug and voting for it are two different things.
Once a bug is<br>
confirmed its state changes from UNCONFORMED to NEW, and
usually once sombody<br>
else bisides the reporter confirms a bug, a person with
appropriate bugzilla<br>
rights sets bug state to NEW. But asking people to vote for a
bug is a waste<br>
of effort, since that doesn't change anything. There are bugs
in Wine bugzilla<br>
with huge amounts of votes on them, but that doesn't suddenly
make a bug more<br>
important to developers for various reasons.<br>
<div><br>
> Voting helps setting priorities for bugs without
nonsense comments.<br>
<br>
</div>
That's the bug severity is for.<br>
<br>
--<br>
<font color="#888888">Dmitry.<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
My point in making the statement is that voting for the bug should
confirm the bug once a certain threshold has been reached.<br>
<br>
People other than the reporter making a comment that a bug occurs
for them too doesn't necessarily make the bug valid, and certainly
doesn't change it's status.<br>
There are bugzilla installs for other projects, IIRC, that do
change the status of bugs from UNCONFIRMED to NEW once there have
been several votes, which helps the developers in terms of how
much time they spend doing what they like (coding) vs doing
maintenance (marking bugs as invalid).<br>
</blockquote>
Tom:<br>
<br>
That already exists. I don't know the threshold of when a bug is
moved from UNCONFIRMED to NEW, but it already exists. We already
have pool voting but you are restricted to the number of votes per
bug.<br>
<br>
My concern is that we get a bunch of 'me too' comments that have no
other substance (like this happens when I do X but not if I do Y or
see the dump file on Ubuntu Lucid when the bug was reported with a
Fedora build) will start to happen. That is why the bug vote system
exists. Yes, there are bugs with thousands of votes, but that just
shows the scope of effect of a particular bug. It DOES not mean
that the bug will be fixed faster or even a developer exists to fix
it. Dmitry is correct in that the bug's priority is set by the
development team and is not influenced by the number of votes.
However, voting does give users input to which bug should be
corrected, not that it will ever be. The reason that I pointed out
bug 421 as one that has many votes, has a high priority, has been
open for years, but still has not been fixed. This is the reality
of life. There has been no developer, to date, that can build code
that meets the standards of the Wine development team and
successfully implements this function. This does not mean this will
never happen.<br>
<br>
So for now, the vote system does what it is supposed to do and the
priority system likewise.<br>
<br>
This is my additional .02 USD on the subject. <br>
<br>
James McKenzie<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>