3fe9f8b52c
No text version of The Bugzilla Guide availabe yet, however. git-svn-id: svn://10.0.0.236/trunk@88928 18797224-902f-48f8-a5cc-f745e15eee43
193 lines
6.0 KiB
HTML
193 lines
6.0 KiB
HTML
<HTML
|
|
><HEAD
|
|
><TITLE
|
|
>Description Flags and Tracking Bugs</TITLE
|
|
><META
|
|
NAME="GENERATOR"
|
|
CONTENT="Modular DocBook HTML Stylesheet Version 1.61
|
|
"><LINK
|
|
REL="HOME"
|
|
TITLE="The Bugzilla Guide"
|
|
HREF="index.html"><LINK
|
|
REL="UP"
|
|
TITLE="The Future of Bugzilla"
|
|
HREF="future.html"><LINK
|
|
REL="PREVIOUS"
|
|
TITLE="Better Searching"
|
|
HREF="searching.html"><LINK
|
|
REL="NEXT"
|
|
TITLE="Bug Issues"
|
|
HREF="bugprobs.html"></HEAD
|
|
><BODY
|
|
CLASS="SECTION"
|
|
BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF"
|
|
TEXT="#000000"
|
|
LINK="#0000FF"
|
|
VLINK="#840084"
|
|
ALINK="#0000FF"
|
|
><DIV
|
|
CLASS="NAVHEADER"
|
|
><TABLE
|
|
WIDTH="100%"
|
|
BORDER="0"
|
|
CELLPADDING="0"
|
|
CELLSPACING="0"
|
|
><TR
|
|
><TH
|
|
COLSPAN="3"
|
|
ALIGN="center"
|
|
>The Bugzilla Guide</TH
|
|
></TR
|
|
><TR
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="10%"
|
|
ALIGN="left"
|
|
VALIGN="bottom"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="searching.html"
|
|
>Prev</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="80%"
|
|
ALIGN="center"
|
|
VALIGN="bottom"
|
|
>Chapter 6. The Future of Bugzilla</TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="10%"
|
|
ALIGN="right"
|
|
VALIGN="bottom"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="bugprobs.html"
|
|
>Next</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
></TR
|
|
></TABLE
|
|
><HR
|
|
ALIGN="LEFT"
|
|
WIDTH="100%"></DIV
|
|
><DIV
|
|
CLASS="SECTION"
|
|
><H1
|
|
CLASS="SECTION"
|
|
><A
|
|
NAME="TRACKINGBUGS"
|
|
>6.3. Description Flags and Tracking Bugs</A
|
|
></H1
|
|
><P
|
|
><P
|
|
CLASS="LITERALLAYOUT"
|
|
>Since I last posted on this issue, we now have "keywords" that solve<br>
|
|
many of the issues of description and status whiteboard keywords. We<br>
|
|
have seen a migration towards keywords, but there is still further to<br>
|
|
go.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Description ( + Status Whiteboard ) Keywords<br>
|
|
--------------------------------------------<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Some description keywords remain. I'd like to hear what reasons, other<br>
|
|
than time, there are for these staying as they are. I'm suspecting many<br>
|
|
are not really being used. Hopefully we can totally remove these<br>
|
|
eventually.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Tracking Bugs<br>
|
|
-------------<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
When I suggested keywords, I did so to get rid of tracking bugs too,<br>
|
|
though we've had less success on that front.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
There are many disadvantages to tracking bugs.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
- They can pollute bugs counts, and you must make sure you exclude<br>
|
|
them. I believe the meta keyword might be used for this purpose.<br>
|
|
- They have an assignee but there is nothing to fix, and that person can<br>
|
|
get whined at by Bugzilla.<br>
|
|
- It would be better to craft your own "dependency tree" rather than<br>
|
|
rely on a fixed hierachy in the bug system.<br>
|
|
- In creating a nice little hierachy, many bugs duplicate information<br>
|
|
that should be available in other ways, eg<br>
|
|
"http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12833" which is<br>
|
|
about beta 1 networking issues. These could fall behind the actual<br>
|
|
data. What tracking bugs are good for, ad hoc lists, is what keywords<br>
|
|
are better for.<br>
|
|
- An automatically generated dependency structure between one "tracking<br>
|
|
bug" and another would be better than a manual one, since it gives exact<br>
|
|
rather than manually set up classifications.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Probably the only feature preventing tracking bugs being replaced is the<br>
|
|
dependency tree. The quintessential tracking bug seems to be bug #7229<br>
|
|
"chofmann's watch list", which probably has about a couple of hundred<br>
|
|
bugs at various levels, which allows a nice visualisation.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Before keywords can replace tracking bugs better visualisation is going<br>
|
|
to be required. General summary reports and dependency forests of a bug<br>
|
|
list ("http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12992") could both<br>
|
|
help, but neither solves the problem totally. Perhaps keywords within<br>
|
|
keywords would help here. In any case, I'm still thinking about this<br>
|
|
one.<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Some tracking bugs could definitely be turned into keywords immediately<br>
|
|
though, and I'll point the finger at<br>
|
|
"http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7954" here since that's<br>
|
|
what came to mind first.</P
|
|
></P
|
|
></DIV
|
|
><DIV
|
|
CLASS="NAVFOOTER"
|
|
><HR
|
|
ALIGN="LEFT"
|
|
WIDTH="100%"><TABLE
|
|
WIDTH="100%"
|
|
BORDER="0"
|
|
CELLPADDING="0"
|
|
CELLSPACING="0"
|
|
><TR
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="33%"
|
|
ALIGN="left"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="searching.html"
|
|
>Prev</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="34%"
|
|
ALIGN="center"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="index.html"
|
|
>Home</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="33%"
|
|
ALIGN="right"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="bugprobs.html"
|
|
>Next</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
></TR
|
|
><TR
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="33%"
|
|
ALIGN="left"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
>Better Searching</TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="34%"
|
|
ALIGN="center"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
><A
|
|
HREF="future.html"
|
|
>Up</A
|
|
></TD
|
|
><TD
|
|
WIDTH="33%"
|
|
ALIGN="right"
|
|
VALIGN="top"
|
|
>Bug Issues</TD
|
|
></TR
|
|
></TABLE
|
|
></DIV
|
|
></BODY
|
|
></HTML
|
|
> |