Tony Finch | 6 Apr 16:26 2004
Picon

Re: So young and already dead?

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> The new box should arrive next week, and I'll get it installed and
> running.

OK, it's a week later than I expected but the machine has now arrived.
I'll get it usable for admin-type people (me and Nigel at first) over the
next few days.

--

-- 
Tony Finch  <dot <at> dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/

eximdev | 8 Apr 16:32 2004
Picon

Bugzilla

Once the new machine is up and running I will be installing Bugzilla. It
occurs to me that there are quite a few choices to be made in how it is
used, and so I thought it would be a good idea to canvas some opinions
now.

The first and simplest questions are to define the lists of priorites,
severities and operating systems available. These are fairly static and
can't be modified through the web interface.

The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms such
as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity describes the
impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker', 'critical', 'major',
'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.

The default set of platforms are: "All", "DEC", "HP", "Macintosh", "PC",
"SGI", "Sun" and "Other". I think I will rename PC to x86. Are there any
that should be ignored and more importantly any that need adding?

The default OS's, minus Windows and MacOS variants are: "All", "MacOS
X", "Linux", "BSDI", "FreeBSD", "NetBSD", "OpenBSD", "AIX", "BeOS",
"HP-UX", "IRIX", "Neutrino", "OpenVMS", "OS/2", "OSF/1", "Solaris",
"SunOS", and "other". There are some that I think should be removed
(Neutrino?!) and I imagine some that are missing. Maybe Linux needs
splitting up a bit?

There are then a number of options that will perhaps influence how the
development process works. There is an optional voting feature, where
people can vote for bugs that they would like to see fixed and perhaps
then help developers prioritise tasks. There is also a QA contact field
that can be enabled per bug - the idea being that developers mark bugs
(Continue reading)

Yann Golanski | 8 Apr 16:43 2004

Re: Bugzilla

Quoth eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk on Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 15:32:43 +0100
> Once the new machine is up and running I will be installing Bugzilla. It
> occurs to me that there are quite a few choices to be made in how it is
> used, and so I thought it would be a good idea to canvas some opinions
> now.

Thanks. 

> The first and simplest questions are to define the lists of priorites,
> severities and operating systems available. These are fairly static and
> can't be modified through the web interface.
> 
> The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms such
> as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity describes the
> impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker', 'critical', 'major',
> 'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.

I agree here.  I like descriptions better than abstract notations -- I
use enough of those for work!

> The default OS's, minus Windows and MacOS variants are: "All", "MacOS
> X", "Linux", "BSDI", "FreeBSD", "NetBSD", "OpenBSD", "AIX", "BeOS",
> "HP-UX", "IRIX", "Neutrino", "OpenVMS", "OS/2", "OSF/1", "Solaris",
> "SunOS", and "other". There are some that I think should be removed
> (Neutrino?!) and I imagine some that are missing. Maybe Linux needs
> splitting up a bit?

I don't think that splitting Linux is a good idea.  After all most
distribution are compatible. 

(Continue reading)

Tabor J. Wells | 8 Apr 16:47 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 03:32:43PM +0100,
eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk <eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk> is thought to have said:

> The default OS's, minus Windows and MacOS variants are: "All", "MacOS
> X", "Linux", "BSDI", "FreeBSD", "NetBSD", "OpenBSD", "AIX", "BeOS",
> "HP-UX", "IRIX", "Neutrino", "OpenVMS", "OS/2", "OSF/1", "Solaris",
> "SunOS", and "other". There are some that I think should be removed
> (Neutrino?!) and I imagine some that are missing. Maybe Linux needs
> splitting up a bit?

And perhaps some versioning of the OSes too? There are plenty of times where
a problem has affected one version but not another (for example the various
build problems between MacOS X 10.2 vs 10.3).

Although that might get kind of clunky quickly... It'd be nice to find a way
to make sure bug openers are clear on the specific release of their OS. 

Is it possible to have a release/version subfield for the OS?

> There are then a number of options that will perhaps influence how the
> development process works. There is an optional voting feature, where
> people can vote for bugs that they would like to see fixed and perhaps
> then help developers prioritise tasks. 

I can see that being useful especially for Wishlist items since historically
the features people want the most are the ones Philip has implemented first.

Also I find myself coming into possession of a couple of Sun E220Rs which I
would be happy to donate to the cause of exim development in whatever
capacity they would be needed most.
(Continue reading)

Andreas Metzler | 8 Apr 16:47 2004

Re: Bugzilla

On 2004-04-08 eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk wrote:
[...]
> The default set of platforms are: "All", "DEC", "HP", "Macintosh", "PC",
> "SGI", "Sun" and "Other". I think I will rename PC to x86.
[...]

Using a brand name to decribe the platform looks suboptimal as it
covers quite a lot (Macintosh: m68k, PowerPC and iirc even PowerPC64).
AMD64 seems to be missing.
               cu andreas, not very familiar with bugzilla
--

-- 
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"

Tony Finch | 8 Apr 16:49 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk wrote:
>
> The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms such
> as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity describes the
> impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker', 'critical', 'major',
> 'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.

They seem easy to confuse. Can these fields be renamed at all? The current
wishlist is categorized by estimated size of task, which seems a useful
thing to keep.

> The default set of platforms are: "All", "DEC", "HP", "Macintosh", "PC",
> "SGI", "Sun" and "Other". I think I will rename PC to x86. Are there any
> that should be ignored and more importantly any that need adding?

ia64, amd64.

> The default OS's, minus Windows and MacOS variants are: "All", "MacOS
> X", "Linux", "BSDI", "FreeBSD", "NetBSD", "OpenBSD", "AIX", "BeOS",
> "HP-UX", "IRIX", "Neutrino", "OpenVMS", "OS/2", "OSF/1", "Solaris",
> "SunOS", and "other". There are some that I think should be removed
> (Neutrino?!) and I imagine some that are missing.

A look at Exim's OS directory would help.

> Maybe Linux needs splitting up a bit?

A good idea.

--

-- 
(Continue reading)

Nigel Metheringham | 8 Apr 17:02 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

> The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms such
> as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity describes the
> impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker', 'critical', 'major',
> 'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.

Prefer the names.  Should there be a "documentation" level here - ie bug
in doc regarding feature rather than feature itself, or is that
confusing 2 entirely different things?

> The default set of platforms are: "All", "DEC", "HP", "Macintosh", "PC",
> "SGI", "Sun" and "Other". I think I will rename PC to x86. Are there any
> that should be ignored and more importantly any that need adding?

DEC???  I remember them....

I guess this is actually closer to architecture, so maybe something like
the gnu architecture tags used by autoconf etc would be more
appropriate.

Don't agree on splitting Linux - its hard to decide when to stop. 
Distrowatch has decided on 10 main distributions which only leaves a few
thousand in the other catagory...  Exim build process does not
particularly distinguish between Linux versions.

There may need to be a packaging catagory for those packaging exim.

	Nigel.

> 
> 
(Continue reading)

John Hall | 8 Apr 17:14 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Nigel Metheringham wrote:

> > The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms
> > such as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity
> > describes the impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker',
> > 'critical', 'major', 'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.
>
> Prefer the names.  Should there be a "documentation" level here - ie
> bug in doc regarding feature rather than feature itself, or is that
> confusing 2 entirely different things?

Documentation will probably be Component of the Exim product. Bugzilla
has a set of Products split into Components.

Initially there will be an Exim product; I don't know if we will need
anything else such as PCRE?

Regards,
John

Mark Hynes | 8 Apr 17:39 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

On Apr 08, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 eximdev <at> jdh28.co.uk wrote:
> >
> > The default priorites are P1 to P5. I prefer more descriptive terms such
> > as 'critical', 'high', 'medium' and 'low'. The severity describes the
> > impact of the bug and the defaults are 'blocker', 'critical', 'major',
> > 'normal', 'minor', 'trivial' and 'enhancement'.
> 
> They seem easy to confuse. Can these fields be renamed at all? The current
> wishlist is categorized by estimated size of task, which seems a useful
> thing to keep.

Would maybe a merge/combination of them be useful?  I agree that the wishlist
'levels' are useful, but it might be nice to easily distinguish between, for
example, a Medium 'enhancement' and a Medium 'normal' bug (in the bug = fault
sense of the word) 

> > Maybe Linux needs splitting up a bit?
> 
> A good idea.

I'm not sure I really see the need, off-hand - pretty much all of the 
distribution specific 'bugs' (or all queries on the exim-users list, really)
seem to be related to a specific package rather than the Exim source itself
(Almost all of the queries seem to be related to the Debian packages 
(unsurprisingly), and if they a package-specific bug is present, 
bugs.debian.org seems to work well and be the right place for it.

Also I think remaining distribution independent might help here - it's very
easy for people who don't know to assume that "the Exim author(s)" are
(Continue reading)

John Hall | 9 Apr 15:35 2004
Picon

Re: Bugzilla

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Tabor J. Wells wrote:

> > The default OS's, minus Windows and MacOS variants are: "All",
> > "MacOS X", "Linux", "BSDI", "FreeBSD", "NetBSD", "OpenBSD", "AIX",
> > "BeOS", "HP-UX", "IRIX", "Neutrino", "OpenVMS", "OS/2", "OSF/1",
> > "Solaris", "SunOS", and "other". There are some that I think should
> > be removed (Neutrino?!) and I imagine some that are missing. Maybe
> > Linux needs splitting up a bit?
>
> And perhaps some versioning of the OSes too? There are plenty of times
> where a problem has affected one version but not another (for example
> the various build problems between MacOS X 10.2 vs 10.3).

> Although that might get kind of clunky quickly... It'd be nice to find
> a way to make sure bug openers are clear on the specific release of
> their OS.
>
> Is it possible to have a release/version subfield for the OS?

Not really, unless we added the feature ourselves. I think if the actual
OS version is important then it will be mentioned in the description of
the bug, which will generally be sufficient. If we find that two
versions of an OS are sufficiently different to be a problem, then we
can split the category then.

Regards,
John


Gmane