Talk:Using Bugzilla

Peter 19Apr11: ROFLMAO James you have brightened my morning up. But a lot of serious points in there.

We should also have "Schroedinger's cat" bugs where you are not sure what the outcome will be - and observing the outcome changes it anyway...

Vaughan 19Apr11:

Excellent, James. Except I'm non-union so don't get a hazmat suit.

Actually, my only comment is that yes, it doesn't need to define the Pn ratings but would be good to link to the definitions; and maybe from there to the definitions of Moonphase, Heisenbug and Comet Returns.

Gale 20Apr11:

James, I'm unsure if this page is meant to be linked to Bug Lists (which "Using Audacity Bugzilla" on bugzilla links to), or to replace Bug Lists? I assume it's extra documentation for Bug Lists, including a warning about bug tracker "toxicity".

If it's additional to bug lists, maybe its headlines as follows would bear repetition on Bug Lists?


 * including the symptoms in the bug title (and keeping that title updated)
 * move discussions about solutions to Wiki, move anyway if 30 + (?) posts (or my suggestion, use the top of "Steps to repro" if a few lines will suffice)
 * (from -quality) post about code errors and warnings to -devel in the first instance (but disregard lib-src warnings)
 * If you keep the headlines here, I suggest they should be in a div at the top so they don't get lost.
 * @Gale, I've put a link from Bug Lists to here, which should be enough. I am trying to avoid instuctionitis - at least on this page.  It sounds like you're feeling a need for something more formal.  If you are, how about starting 'Bugzilla Workflow' or 'Bugzilla Rules', even with just the headline rules, and we can link to it from both these pages?  It could be good to cater to both people who need clarity about what to do, and people who need to have a sense of why we do things the way we do.  This is all experimental.  I simply don't know what is going to work best.  I do know I want the Audacity group to be fun to work in and productive. -- James 09:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Gale: I don't think we have so many rules/guidelines (or should have) that we need three pages. I have two points. First, the article is called "Using Bugzilla", but really it's a mix of some guidelines interspersed with a (mostly deserved) diatribe against commercial bug trackers and bug tracking. I think the article is a bit jumbled as it is now and could do with the "headlines" suggested keeping together. The meaning of Moonphase and Heisenbug is quite important too, but it's rather a long way down, and confusingly suggests an importance "Comet Returns" that we don't have. I'm fine with keeping all the current material here, but suggest some "Quick Points" or restructuring may help. Vaughan's idea of linking to Bug_Lists seems good too. We seem to have had a significant outbreak of instructionitis with release processes, so there seems some demand for it. It's a balance, with I guess more need for it with releases than in bugtracking. However some bugzilla users will definitely want a bit more instruction on what to post on bugzilla and what not, as well as how to do it. The fact this isn't clear enough to everyone has created its own "toxicity" recently. I think bugzilla posting of compiling issues and policy issues needs to be covered somewhere, and probably here is best.
 * We can try that. How about you create a section for it on the talk page, with your understanding?  If it fits with the main page it can migrate to it.  If not we can move it to a new page of its own.  Probably moonphase et-al, and PX..P5 belong on the same page as each other, and they aren't really bug lists, so maybe collect the lot onto a new slightly instructionitisited page?  Up to you.  --James 09:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Gale: It probably won't fit with the main Bug Lists page, for the reason you state. OTOH I wonder if the link on Bugzilla to Bug Lists is all that useful when you are already on Bugzilla. I could perhaps see getting rid of the link on bugzilla "ask for an account" which is mainly a source of very dubious offers of "help" keep the old link to Bug Lists but call it what it is e.g. "All Canned Searches", then make a new link with our very slightly "instructionised" page. Making that new link this page Using Bugzilla would have done me, but if you want to keep this page more loose and discursive, we'll have to have three pages in total. If you want three pages, this page could end up threadbare. I think I could probably work in what I want to here, so e.g. some of the text on Bug Lists about P1 > PX would move. So I would suggest I roughed something out on this talk page. Sound OK?
 * James: Sounds more than OK. Given what you say I'd encourage you to try it out directly on the actual pages.  No need for a third page.  Let's rename that Bug Lists link from Bugzilla to 'Canned Searches' or 'Canned Bugzilla Searches' (not 'All' because we may have some searches e.g. in the footer that aren't on that page).  Maybe rename the wiki page to match too?  I don't know.  We can then as you say also have a link to Using Bugzilla from Bugzilla, and drop the information about how to ask for an account onto one of the two wiki pages.  You can work in what you want on Using Bugzilla, or on the canned searches page.  I'll then make changes in situ.