Last modified: 2007-05-18 17:51:28 UTC
First of all, the page http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html#resolution dosn't ti fully reflect the options you get to use, for example is LATER and REMIND not defined there. The Priority field should be changed to have less ambigious field. I would suggest simlar fields as the default mantis installation: *None *Low *'''Normal''' *High *Urgent *Immidiate Also from mantis, a field defining reproducibility: *always *sometimes *random *'''have not tried''' *unable to reproduce *N/A The field Platform/Hardware is in my opinion irrelevant, better to change it to something relevant, like a field for used browser. The field Target Milestone should be updated or removed. The system for voting for bugs seems to be useless (is there any dev that goes after the votes anyway). The System with dependecy graphs seems broken.
Report upstream as applicable.
(In reply to comment #1) > Report upstream as applicable. Upstream? this are "local" changes, not "upstream" changes.
(In reply to comment #0) > The Priority field should be changed to have less ambigious field. I would > suggest simlar fields as the default mantis installation: If you don't understand the priority and severity fields, don't mess about with them. They're not for end users to play with, anyway; they're there for us to set a level as we see fit to organise this stuff. > Also from mantis, a field defining reproducibility: > > *always > *sometimes > *random > *'''have not tried''' > *unable to reproduce > *N/A This isn't Mantis. Reproducibility of bugs can be detailed in the comment; ideally, one-off cases will be closed as not-bugs anyway. > The field Platform/Hardware is in my opinion irrelevant, better to change it to > something relevant, like a field for used browser. Well, it's not irrelevant in all cases. It's not irrelevant when users are reporting incompatibilities which arise on different systems. It's not irrelevant for server-side stuff. It's not really irrelevant at all, in fact. > The system for voting for bugs seems to be useless (is there any dev that goes > after the votes anyway). It's a useful "watchlist" feature, I find. We've got bigger fish to fry than to mess about with BugZilla...
I understand the priority field, but most people don't, thats why I suggest to rename them to something less ambiguous. And I know this isn't mantis, I just took the examples from there. Please don't close a bug, just because you dislike some part of it. it's not fair to others.
Who cares about fairness? It's not about that, it's about not wasting time and about things making sense.
One thing that *would* be useful is tweaking some of the component names, because their meanings often aren't immediately obvious even if the intended meanings (as listed in the component descriptions) are sensible divisions of requests. Wikimedia/Site requests -> Site creation Wikimedia/Language setup -> Site configuration (actually this apparently includes setting up new languages at present, but it makes more sense to have a dedicated field for the overwhelmingly most common Wikimedia-product request) MediaWiki/Page rendering -> Wikitext rendering As for priority, that field *is* definitely useless. There are about five bugs in the system whose priority was actually set by devs to something other than Normal. Actual priority is set by every dev for himself, and is manifested in bugs being self-assigned. The field mainly serves to give Rob, me, and other anal-retentive people an excuse to clog up wikibugs-l. (In reply to comment #0) > The system for voting for bugs seems to be useless (is there any dev that goes > after the votes anyway). Yes. At least sort of. I often find it convenient to order by number of votes when searching for bugs, too. And it hopefully gives us somewhere to send people who would otherwise be inclined to post "FIX THIS BUG NOW IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT". Plus, it's a watchlist that doesn't spam everyone who's watching it telling them you added the bug to your CC list.
about the graph problem, seems to be a permission problem on the server: [0:1][azatoth@azabox tmp]$ wget http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/data/webdot/d8RSx6TUcO.dot.map --20:14:20-- http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/data/webdot/d8RSx6TUcO.dot.map => `d8RSx6TUcO.dot.map' Slår upp bugzilla.wikimedia.org... 145.97.39.130, 2001:610:672:1:145:97:39:130 Connecting to bugzilla.wikimedia.org|145.97.39.130|:80... ansluten. HTTP-begäran skickad, väntar på svar... 403 Forbidden 20:14:20 FEL 403: Forbidden.
One issue per bug please. I am creating new bug for comment 6 (bug 9952) and comment 7 (bug 9953). Reclosing bug as per comment 3 by Robchurch.
