Re: New Bug Buddy kind of bug

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

I am not confident enough to touch the Perl code, but I have another
comment.

On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:07:01PM +0200, Fernando Herrera wrote:
> I've just checked to cvs HEAD a new feature for bug buddy: a new page
> asking for the bug type. Just now:
> 
> 1) The application has a wrong behaviour
> 2) The documentation is wrong
> 3) The translation is wrong
> 4) Request a missing feature
> 5) Debug a crashed or running application (experts only)
> 
> 	2 --> adds doc keyword
> 	3 --> adds i18n keyword
> 	4 --> sets seveity as an enhancement
> 	5 --> goes to debug page

At least at first glance, this looks like a really good idea. My only
comment would be that the first option is possibly ambiguous. You are
going to get a bunch of "request for enhancement" things going in there
as somebody argues "it is completely wrong that the ftp client does not
behave like the Blazzle(tm) client" (okay, I am exaggerating here, but I
think you can see the possibilities).

Unfortunately, every alternative I come up with has the same problem, or
is needlessly verbose ("The application behaves inconsistently" is not
ideal, for example, because "inconsistently" is really too big a word to
use here). Maybe I am being paranoid about this.

In any case, I think whatever you put is an improvement on the existing
functionality, since it gets us one step closer to having the bug
correctly classified for free. Nice job. :-)

Cheers,
Malcolm

-- 
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.