Re: [Usability] Overthinking things.

[kerberos piestar net]

Quoting Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh pop jaring my>:

[Hide Quoted Text]
I think in many cases having/requiring the user/"bug" submitter "talk"
directly to the developer may not be the best way of doing things. And
instead someone else should be between the two.

For example, I've seen users being asked to split their bug reports
into multiple bugs.

If the system requires users to convert a _valid_ "stuff is broken"
report into multiple bug reports, before broken stuff gets fixed, then
it just makes things less likely to be fixed. The users might actually
have alternatives they can use, so they go away and stuff stays broken.
The developer may feel that's fine with him/her, but it does not help
the project.
I completely agree with everything you have said.  When I first tried  
to get involved in
Linux that is pretty much how I assumed it worked - the community used  
the software,
discussed it and how to improve it and then the developers take that  
feedback and
incorporate it.  It never occured to me that the users do not give any  
feedback or get
involved outside bug reports.

I seriously doubt there would be a lack of volunteers to sort, track  
and present such
information based on such discussions.  I can almost see (I shudder to  
use this example)
an X-Factor style judging system where ideas and changes are  
discussed, and if accepted
merged into the actual project plan (or submitted as a 'good idea').   
Provided the judges
knew what they were doing that would act as a filter between the mob  
and the devs.

It would certainly be nice to see the community being leveraged as  
more than just a
beta-test crew.