Bugzilla bugs policy

Post by **arnetheduck** » 2004-06-27 13:53

So, we have 5 votes until an item is tagged as "new"...you don't have to touch them until that happens, but if you see anything interesting or manage to confirm the bug yourselves you're welcome to confirm it by hand.

The only crash reports I want in the bugzilla are the ones that are 100% reproducible, i e "crash when click here" or "crash when loading filelist, filelist attached"...the rest will go to the automatic crash report tool that's still under development...

Feature requests also go to the bugzilla, with status "enhancement"...the same goes for rejected features, I still have to make a "rejected features" link somewhere that automatically searches the bugzilla for rejects...

I'll put a few markers in the old trackers, anything past those markers is to be deleted. simple and effect way to teach the bastards to read =)

comments? suggestions?

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2004-06-27 13:57

So you'll just do a mass close/delete of the RFEs and bugs? And there'll be a sentinel post in each saying not to use the tracker?

That sounds good to me, it's a good way of seeing what features are really valuable to users.

Post by **arnetheduck** » 2004-06-27 14:31

well, they'll be left open for the record for a while I think, then I'll just remove the trackers from public view on sf...

dcplusplus bugs list subscriptions so far:

absolution@spray.se
b.ali@btinternet.com
j_s@telia.com
joakim_tosteberg@hotmail.com
todd.pederzani@verizon.net
walter@djcvt.net

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2004-06-27 14:51

arnetheduck wrote:well, they'll be left open for the record for a while I think, then I'll just remove the trackers from public view on sf...

Nice, that's far, far less draconian than what I was envisioning.

TheParanoidOne · Post by **TheParanoidOne** » 2004-06-27 15:16

When I attempt to enter a new bug, the default status is NEW. Shouldn't it be UNCONFIRMED? Or is it the fact that I can confirm a bug that makes it default to NEW?

Post by **arnetheduck** » 2004-06-27 16:31

i think it becomes unconfirmed automatically...

TheParanoidOne · Post by **TheParanoidOne** » 2004-06-27 17:10

arnetheduck wrote:i think it becomes unconfirmed automatically...

Apparently not.

Post by **arnetheduck** » 2004-06-27 17:36

try with a normal user...
(or is that what you did?)

TheParanoidOne · Post by **TheParanoidOne** » 2004-06-27 17:42

No, that's not what I did. I don't have a normal user account to test it with.

I think the fact that you (as a normal user) posted bug #1 as an UNCONFIRMED is probably a good indication that it's just a user level thing and nothing to really worry about ... I hope.

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2004-06-27 21:28

Nothing to worry about there, since we have our first bug =)

Should any of the semi-officially planned things go into the tracker, or should that be for end-user requests only?

TheParanoidOne · Post by **TheParanoidOne** » 2004-06-27 22:17

GargoyleMT wrote:Nothing to worry about there, since we have our first bug =)

Good thing or bad thing?

It's in the unconfirmed stage, so it's all good.

Post by **arnetheduck** » 2004-06-28 06:48

GargoyleMT wrote:Nothing to worry about there, since we have our first bug =)

Should any of the semi-officially planned things go into the tracker, or should that be for end-user requests only?

Please let me know what we've planned semi-officially? =)

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2004-06-28 15:56

arnetheduck wrote:Please let me know what we've planned semi-officially? =)

Ideas in my head, without code:
Bitzi.com lookup of TTH for single files in queue and search results (no mass-generation/lookup to hammer their servers)
magnet link copying for queue/search items
magnet link registering/taking in the shell (complicated since most magnets will not have a tiger tree entry)
grouping of search results based on hash value

Those will help with the adoption of hashing, and are the easiest to name.

I'm all for a good way to discuss what features DC++ might need.

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2004-06-30 00:05

GargoyleMT wrote:Bitzi.com lookup of TTH for single files in queue and search results (no mass-generation/lookup to hammer their servers)
magnet link copying for queue/search items
magnet link registering/taking in the shell (complicated since most magnets will not have a tiger tree entry)

These are all pretty short patches, so on second thought, it's not necessary. But other most requested features would be things like: multisource downloading and dropping of slow users.

(I'm trying to think of features that we might be able to start using the "blocks" field. Like exact size matching, or meta-data being predicated upon ADC support.

Bugzilla bugs policy

Bugzilla bugs policy

Who is online