Nicklas.Borjesson at ws.se
Sun May 3 14:52:53 CDT 2009
>So you suggest making the severity ratings meaningless to anyone but
>... well, you don't actually mention anyone knowing what they *really*
>mean, but I assume an exclusive clique of developers or bugzilla
>admins? Users have different opinions on what level of bug they
>encounter depending on what *task* they're trying to perform, which is
>not particularly useful to developers who need strict reproducability.
No, I mean that the actual meaning of the words "low", "medium", "high" and "Critical" will suffice.
I think most people have a fair understanding what "medium" and "critical" means.
This is not meaningless at all, to trying to clarify these levels is quite pointless though.
Yes, some people tend to exaggerate their issues, but that's just the way it is.
And to my experience, they are few. Most actually don't exaggerate as much.
To them, the situation IS critical, bordering on panic.
Rather, thinking that their users are exaggerating is a way for developers to not let reality come to close.
Hell, I do it myself right now. :-)
I don't see how the reproducibility connects to the severity level?
Regarding the priority flag..i was referring to it's visibility, not its state.
>There already is a separate category flag. It's called "severity" and
>it indicates roughly the amount of *functionality* lost due to the
>bug. "Priority" does not indicate the severity of a bug; a bug may
>have low priority due to limitations outside of Wine (such as some
>blocker bugs for copy-protection systems which can't be supported in
My point is that there should be no need for that flag.
Let the users have it as input, and let the developers use component+priority.
>You're not going to like this, but users don't matter quite *that*
>much on bugzilla. The bug tracker is a developer's tool, and although
>users are essential to the process (submitting bugs and new
>information on request), it should be designed as a developer's tool.
>A user's impression of their problem is irrelevant to the hard data
>they can provide about lost or missing functionality.
You are right. I don't like it.
Especially because the bug tracker is the entire projects tool, not only the developers.
I this matter can only compare with my own professional(commercial) experience and there,
the ones submitting bugs has a *lot* to say, since they won't submit bugs unless they are
critical if we don't present them with a smooth interface.
Hmm..only critical bugs..now where have i heard about that..? :-)
More information about the wine-devel