Michael Schwendt wrote:
If that (and the "Participate" menu) is not obvious enough case it >
becomes increasingly popular for people to just submit their
reports at bugzilla.fedora.us instead, picking a completely unrelated component, something must be done about the Fedora Project pages. However I don't know what would help. Integrating an official Fedora FAQ could help.
If people aren't reading the the official website as it is...a long flat FAQ i doubt will help. Personally i think people don't understand the concept of the unfolding menu on the left-hand side. My vote would be to add a flat site-map link so people looking for information, and aren't click happy enough to click through the menus haphazardly to find the schedule or the communicate page or whatever it is they want, can just hit the site map link and see all the page links. I think the pages as named are pretty self-explanatory...I think the fold out menu on the homepage is not helping the lazy people who aren't interested in reading all of the website to find the info they want. That said, i think its in every community member's best interest to make an effort to read the whole official website, so personally I'm fine with the fold out menu. But its not an easy to use quick reference, a site map would be better for that.
But the more general topic of how to get users interacting with bugzilla effectively, is something worthy of discussion. Right now I'm getting ready to focus my very limited talents at trying to come up with a Fedora specific variation of the Gnome bug squad guidelines for testing and bug hunting. I have have a very dim hope of getting my crap together in time, to have a draft out for test1 beta testing. I've been spending some time nagging developers on irc for ideas, like boilerplate responses and bug hunting tips and experimenting with calls for focused functionality testing and doing community triage commenting. All these sorts of things are variants of what Gnome is doing with the bug squad. So my short term plan is to have some sort of reasonable useful testing guideline draft in place to float to testers for FC2 test releases. A test of the testing guidelines. I just need to get my crap together and mock up a draft. And i could really use help on that, because I'm no technical writer.
Long term though, i think the best solution for bug reporting and bug testing is to build end-user oriented tools that use the xmlrpc interface to bugzilla effectively. There is a lot of room to explore the idea of a bug reporting tool inside Core, that comes with some predefined test suite scripts and system information gathering scripts. Becuase Fedora is a specific platform...a specific os, any Core bug reporting tool can do things a Gnome specific bug-buddy can not because Gnome has to be cross-platform. Use of a Fedora Core bug-report utility can mandate the installation of pieces of Core to make sure the more advanced test suite and information gathering scripts do their jobs well. Of course there are trade-off on issues like privacy, but i think there is room for an attempt at a balanced tool that helps prevent bugreports that lack even the most basic information that developers really need to diagnose the problem. And if the bug reporting tool is clever enough to understand where packages came from..it might even be able to report bugs to even 3rd party bugzilla's. But thats really long term, and I'm not the person with the technical ability to build that sort of tool. I'll beat the crap out of it to test it if it gets built, but i can't build it.
-jef
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 10:09, Jef Spaleta wrote:
But the more general topic of how to get users interacting with bugzilla effectively, is something worthy of discussion. Right now I'm getting ready to focus my very limited talents at trying to come up with a Fedora specific variation of the Gnome bug squad guidelines for testing and bug hunting. I have have a very dim hope of getting my crap together in time, to have a draft out for test1 beta testing. I've been spending some time nagging developers on irc for ideas, like boilerplate responses and bug hunting tips and experimenting with calls for focused functionality testing and doing community triage commenting. All these sorts of things are variants of what Gnome is doing with the bug squad. So my short term plan is to have some sort of reasonable useful testing guideline draft in place to float to testers for FC2 test releases. A test of the testing guidelines. I just need to get my crap together and mock up a draft. And i could really use help on that, because I'm no technical writer.
Maybe I'm speaking for myself only, but my biggest issue so far is the number of bugzilla's a person will have to deal with. For Fedora alone there's redhat's and fedora US.
But (with good reason) many FC1 bugs are handled with a comment to 'submit the bug to the upstream maintainer' so I immediately have to add mozilla and ximian and every other active project that I have interest in and spend effort on debugging.
It's just too many accounts. For my part, the biggest help would be a trusted gateway between some of these big bugzilla so tha I could log in to redhat's, enter a bug, and then toggle a switch that says "list with upstream maintainer". (On the same idea, a trusted gateway to sourceforge would probably be useful).
Is this sort of thing conceivably possible?
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:13:08AM -0500, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
It's just too many accounts. For my part, the biggest help would be a trusted gateway between some of these big bugzilla so tha I could log in to redhat's, enter a bug, and then toggle a switch that says "list with upstream maintainer". (On the same idea, a trusted gateway to sourceforge would probably be useful).
Is this sort of thing conceivably possible?
Forwarding bugs to other bugzillas is theoretically possible but I've never seen code to do it (and you still need some work by hand because every bugzilla has its own user database and its own ideas of things like product names)