| 1 |
On 03/06/2015 07:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> It doesn't hurt to have a recommendation, and personally I really appreciate |
| 5 |
>> when people (yes, that includes developers and wranglers ;-) update the line |
| 6 |
>> to be more informative. There already is a recommendation on the wiki, part |
| 7 |
>> of the Bug Wranglers project [1]. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Sure, beautiful bug reports are nice, but if people are suffering |
| 11 |
> burnout over editing the line it this doesn't seem like the biggest |
| 12 |
> value-add to me. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> By all means have a standard. But, don't discourage but reporters by |
| 15 |
> asking them to rework reports if they don't conform, and don't |
| 16 |
> discourage maintainers or bug wranglers by yelling at them if they |
| 17 |
> don't clean these up. People can of course can still make things as |
| 18 |
> pretty as they want to. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> The only reason I could see for rigid adherence to a standard is if |
| 21 |
> we're using the field as input to some kind of program, and if we're |
| 22 |
> doing that then the data should really be broken down into appropriate |
| 23 |
> fields like atom, desc, etc. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> So, have a best practice, but let's not get carried away with this |
| 26 |
> sort of thing to the point where people feel like it is getting in the |
| 27 |
> way. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I too feel that whatever gets decided here will soon be forgotten and |
| 31 |
people will revert back to whatever makes more sense to them. Would it |
| 32 |
be terribly difficult to set a template in the "Summary" field whenever |
| 33 |
the "Keywording and Stabilization" component is selected when filing a bug? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Regards, |
| 37 |
Markos Chandras |
Archives