Changes to the bugzilla workflow: 2 proposals

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2016, Martin Gräßlin wrote:

> No, that would affect more. For example when looking for a bug report I go to
> bugs.kde.org, Browse, kwin, component and then have a very small list of the
> bugs for that component and can find the bug report.
> 
> If all the nonsentical needsinfo bugs get in there and are not hidden by
> default, it gets completely useless.
> 
> Also I don't want to be at 1000 open bug reports in a year. Consider the
> social impact of that if weekly-bug-summary stats include those bugs.

Fortunately, in that case, the weekly info page has disappeared from
the front page... But yes, needinfo is a category that applies to a bug,
it isn't just "I have a question for this person who reported or commented
on this bug" -- it's this bug report is useless without further info.

Now, if the status automatically changed back if info was added, that would
be a nice improvement.

> 
> Please note that in case of KWin a needsinfo means we never hear back in 99
> out of 100 cases and as I mentioned before we get several of those per day. My
> bug workflow is completely focused only on marking bugs as needsinfo. Yes,
> it's broken and yes for a high profile product like KWin it's even worse.
> 
> So any change of the process must ensure that we are not swamped in useless
> bug reports destroying all the default views and stats bugzilla provides.
> 
> Overall from what I read in this thread so far about it, I'm quite against
> this change. For me the focus is on getting those bugs away as I know that we
> won't get the backtrace. Try asking Arch users for a backtrace...
> 

I have to agree. Krita (+1075, -1210) isn't in the plasmashell category of 
bugs (+2341, -2101) per year yet, but it's more than kwin (+646, -680), and 
bugzilla's workflow needs to be as simple as possible to support me. I don't
think changing the way needinfo works simplifies my workflow.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org