[Tiki-devel] Regression tracking (RE: dev.tiki.org issue tracker: category for bugs)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Tiki-devel] Regression tracking (RE: dev.tiki.org issue tracker: category for bugs)

Cloutier, Philippe (DGARI-Consultant)
Hi Jonny,

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Jonny Bradley [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Envoyé : 17 juillet 2017 17:39
> À : Tiki developers <[hidden email]>
> Objet : Re: [Tiki-devel] dev.tiki.org issue tracker: category for bugs
>
> No (sorry), I think it's the pointless duplicate version numbers plus regression that should be removed,
> no idea why it's thee in the first place.

If I understand correctly, I disagree. If a report is marked as a regression affecting 15 and 16, that is not the same as a bug in the "15.x regression" category. The former indicates a regression that may have been introduced between versions 14 and 15, but which may have been introduced earlier. The latter was necessarily introduced in version 15.

Although in practice, since the names "a.x regression" are not perfectly clear, many tickets use these categories as if they simply indicated a regression which affects the specified version.

The current system is clearly suboptimal, but we should not just remove these categories.
 

> [...]
>
>
> > On 17 Jul 2017, at 22:28, Dr. Sassafras <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe we should separate regression from the big type. We could have a radio: regression
> "unknown, yes, no, n/a"
> >
> > Then we select what kind of bug it is, and in addition select if it's known if it is a regression than it can
> be selected separately.
> >
> > One consideration is that we already have a separate place where regression can be selected, and
> that's when choosing the version.
> >
> > Brendan
> >
> >> On Jul 17, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Cloutier, Philippe (DGARI-Consultant)
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jonny,
> >> Heh, good point.
> >>
> >> I don't know if #6394 is a regression.
> >>
> >> But #6401 can certainly be considered as a regression. Although one could argue the opposite since
> this new insertion screen did not exist before, so an instance can be configured to remain as reliable as
> before. I nearly mentioned in my last mail that the distinction between regressions and non-
> regressions is additionally not always clear-cut.
> >>
> >>> -----Message d'origine-----
> >>> De : Jonny Bradley [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >>> Envoyé : 17 juillet 2017 15:17
> >>> À : Tiki developers <[hidden email]>
> >>> Objet : Re: [Tiki-devel] dev.tiki.org issue tracker: category for bugs
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Aren't they both regressions?
> >>>
> >>> jb
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 17 Jul 2017, at 19:48, Cloutier, Philippe (DGARI-Consultant)
> <Philippe.Cloutier.externe@mern-
> >>> mffp.gouv.qc.ca> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Brendan,
> >>>> https://dev.tiki.org/tiki-view_tracker_item.php?itemId=6394 and https://dev.tiki.org/item6401
> are
> >>> examples.
> >>>> Clearly, not all bugs without errors are consistency bugs, regressions, security issues, usability
> issues
> >>> or conflict between 2 features.
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
> >>>>> De : Dr. Sassafras [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >>>>> Envoyé : 17 juillet 2017 13:43
> >>>>> À : Tiki developers <[hidden email]>
> >>>>> Objet : Re: [Tiki-devel] dev.tiki.org issue tracker: category for bugs
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can you give an example of a bug that doesn't fit into those categories? Perhaps another
> category
> >>>>> would work?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Brendan
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 1:32 PM, Cloutier, Philippe (DGARI-Consultant)
> >>> <Philippe.Cloutier.externe@mern-
> >>>>> mffp.gouv.qc.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>> Our issue tracker has the following categories for bugs:
> >>>>>> Bug: Consistency
> >>>>>> Bug: Error
> >>>>>> Bug: Regression
> >>>>>> Bug: Security
> >>>>>> Bug: Usability
> >>>>>> Bug: conflict of two features (each works well independently)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But it appears to lack a category for bugs in general. I am considering to create either "Bug:
> >>> general"
> >>>>> or "Bug". If anyone  opposes, please speak up.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> TikiWiki-devel mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > TikiWiki-devel mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> TikiWiki-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
TikiWiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tikiwiki-devel