Severity levels

[Austin English]

2009/5/2 Nicklas Börjesson <Nicklas.Borjesson at ws.se>:
>>> 2. Critical  "Critical problem that prevents all applications from working"
>>>
>>> - Possible, if everyone stopped testing code completely, and also unlikely to be reported by a user.
>
>>No, critical bugs are usually opened by non-Linux users.
>
> Here I did search, and actually, most bugs have "linux" as an operating system so I couldn't come to that conclusion.
> Anyway, I get your point.  Still don't really see why this is a separate severity level, though.
> Wouldn't this be a "wineloader" component or something?

Not all critical bugs are caused by the loader. It's possible for
d3d/ole/etc. to have a similar effect.

>>> 3. Major     "Major loss of functionality for a wide range of applications
>>>
>>> - Isn't this just all bugs that has more than $arbitrary_number of applications linked to them? An aggregate,
>>> rather than a level?
>
>>No, it's actually what it say, a WIDE RANGE of applications.
>
> Ok..I just thought that "wide range" could be translated into a number or percentage instead of an expression.
> I thought the opposite way...but couldn't possibly all bugs in wine affect a wide range of appliacations?

Sure, it's just not as common as you'd think.

>> Bugzilla is to track bugs, it's not a user support forum, and the bugs
>> should be classified as the dev's want them to be classified.
>
> No, I know it is not a support forum(Is users using is as such a big problem?).

You'd be surprised...

> But it is nevertheless an interface towards the users of wine. A place they go to when all else has failed(hopefully).
> And as such it is utterly confusing(for them) and already leads to pointless misunderstandings and frustrations
> regarding, for example, the severity flag.
>
> Anyway. I can't help but feel that we are on completely different pages in many ways.
> I think that the users should have quite a say with regards to how important a bug is, because for every user
> putting in the (considerable for a user) effort of reporting a bug, there are dozens that don't say anything at all.
> In wine's case, because of it's size, this might actually be hundreds. It's badwill.
>
> So currently, there is no way at all for users to influence these priorities. To me, user priorities would be a
> considerable factor, obviously not the only one, but considerable.
> I know that wine, to a large extent, Is maintained by unpaid individuals(like myself) that want to prioritize themselves.
> I don't want to take that right away from them, I just feel that it's bad practice to disregard the users' priorities.

Keep in mind, most developers are unpaid as well. They're the ones
fixing the bugs, not users. While users are important, no work gets
done without the developers. Developers have no way to prioritize one
user over another. The best way to prioritize *your* bug is to make a
*good* bug report. Make sure all needed information is included. Get a
testcase if possible. Provide the needed traces, etc. Even better, is
to write a patch yourself. The source is there, and there is nothing
stopping you from writing a patch.

As a developer that spends more time testing than coding/etc., I see
both sides of the coin. But keep in mind, that there are thousands of
users, and just as many applications. Prioritizing one
user/application over the other is almost always impossible, for
obvious reasons. Picking your bug instead of Bob's bug just pisses Bob
off, and vice versa. So how is most bug fixing done? Developers big
bugs that interest them, that affect them personally, or that have
good bug reports, which makes it fixing it much easier on them.

-- 
-Austin