RFC: Adding distribution field to Bugzilla

[Michael Stefaniuc]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/08/2014 05:38 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> I don't think it matters, really. Any of this.
Quite the opposite, it does matter.

Bugzilla is primary a tool for the triagers / developers working the
bug. It is not a support ticket tracker, it sucks at that.

> I've been using github a lot more in newer projects and I have
> grown a certain dislike of Bugzilla, especially of the *amount of
> information* we ask of users. It is in fact quite therapeutic to be
> able to submit a bug by filling it in a couple of seconds. To see
> what I mean:
> 
> https://bugs.winehq.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wine
> 
> We ask for a component, 99% of which most users will have no idea 
> about. Severity, which not only isn't taken seriously on the
> winehq bugzilla but also users should have no say in. A plethora of
> OSes when 95%+ will be Linux and most of the others OSX. Hardware,
> which almost never matters (and when it does, is usually set
> wrong). And then on top of all this, we ask people to spend time
> creating output files rather than paste with a very unfriendly red
> STOP sign.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, this is one of the better bugzilla UIs I've
> seen.
That was added after previous complains about the usability of the
default bugzilla bug entry page.

> But it's still horrible.
Mockups of the better design / workflow are welcome. Patches too.
Bonus points for adding an application into Wine that grabs the
relevant Wine/host info in a form that can be just entered into
bugzilla with just one copy and paste. And then all that is needed to
be typed in manually would be a Summary and a Problem Description.

> I know I haven't been active in Wine lately but here is a couple 
> pennies worth of feedback: If distro patches to Wine truly become 
> problematic, it's a sign of an area that should be prioritized. And
> if those patches are so low quality that they create a host of
> problems but are still deemed critical enough by the distros to be
> included, then those bugs that are filed *will* matter and those
> patches should
You can as well say that it isn't a priority for the distributions to
work with upstream to get those patches in. So if it isn't a priority
for the distributions, why should it be one for Wine?

Anyway there is definitely a need for a Wine Staging tree to help
smooth the path for those type of patches into upstream Wine.
Luckily there are now a few people that are trying to do just that:
https://github.com/wine-compholio/wine-staging
And their looking for more helping hands and interesting patches.

bye
	michael

> really be improved. Realistically though, how often does it
> matter, and is it significant enough to make *everyone* go through
> yet another field when filing a new bug? J. Leclanche
> 
> 
> 2014-10-07 23:27 GMT+02:00 Rosanne DiMesio
> <dimesio at earthlink.net>:
>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:17:32 -0500 Austin English
>> <austinenglish at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Howdy everyone,
>>> 
>>> I'd like to add a distribution field to Bugzilla, to make it
>>> easier to identify when users may have additional patches
>>> installed by their distribution and/or other distribution
>>> specific issues (e.g., 
>>> https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35413). It would be a
>>> drop down selection, with the major distributions listed (i.e.,
>>> ArchLinux, Debian, Fedora, Gentoo, Mint, RedHat, Slackware,
>>> Suse, Ubuntu, other).
>>> 
>>> Comments/feedback welcome.
>>> 
>> 
>> I like the idea, but one thing that might cause problems is the
>> issue of how to classify Ubuntu derivatives. There are lots of
>> them, they don't all have "buntu" in their names, but they do
>> generally use the Ubuntu Wine packages. Are those users supposed
>> to pick "Ubuntu" or "Other"?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFUNQSM0ei8kcpE1VERAqtRAKCag9uVmCNMLbFd5NH32JJG1bmNCACfU7+F
6MKeTCLc/78veXkvIlauvuw=
=xVyK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----