From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <434E0C91.1050607@domain.hid> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:28:17 +0300 From: Heikki Lindholm MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Bug tracker. References: <17229.31343.98877.781567@domain.hid> <434DEDDD.4020607@domain.hid> <17229.64735.691164.146992@domain.hid> <434E003E.4020604@domain.hid> <17230.2176.893187.59758@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <17230.2176.893187.59758@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Gilles Chanteperdrix kirjoitti: > Heikki Lindholm wrote: > > There's the "if". What I've seen on sourceforge is that often times bugs > > that are reported on the ml don't appear in the tracker and vice versa, > > although the tracker can probably be configured to forward reports to > > ml, or? Who will type the ml-only reports to the tracker? Btw. would you > > only allow developers to file bugs into the tracker? > > I would use it as a one line answer to bug reports on the mailing > list... I would prefer users to always post on the mailing list first, > and if it looks like a real bug, a developer would ask the user to fill > a bug report. That might work. As a case study of something to avoid: I know at least three persistent bugs in the firefox browser I'm using and I thought about reporting them, ending up in http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/bugs which in turn leads to many worksome steps and eventually to http://www.mozilla.org/quality/bug-writing-guidelines.html Blech! It seems easier to write a firefox from ground up than giving them a bug report --- and thus my observations stay unreported. Moral of the story: keep it simple! -- Heikki Lindholm