incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reizinger Zoltán <zreizin...@hdsnet.hu>
Subject Re: Speaking of JIRA, Where's Ours?
Date Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:36:08 GMT
To understand how bug tracker worked in OOo, starting point is OOo QA page:
http://qa.openoffice.org/
How OOo used bug tracking, this flowchart show more than words:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/workflowcharts/defect_triaging.pdf

I participated in database QA as volunteer my experience in short:
The bug tracker used mostly by developers, qa and users.
If user submitted support question, they usually forwarded to users 
mailing lists/forum, depending on which part of OOo bug was submitted.

The users habit was different, the power users if submitted well 
described problems/bugs, usually followed the bug cycle, and when bug 
fixed in development version of OOo, tested in their environment.
First time bug submitter users, submitted bug and forget it, if they not 
described well the symptoms, not answered even, if we asked some 
additional information.
The searching was difficult, if you not know right words, you not get 
already submitted bugs, it is caused lot of effort, to clean bug tracker 
from duplicate issues.

Zoltan

2011.06.30. 18:56 keltezéssel, Shane Curcuru írta:
> Here's a meta-question for those who've previously worked on OOo: who 
> are the primary users of the bugtracking system?
>
> Most other Apache projects have sysadmins or developers as the primary 
> customers, hence the majority of people both seeking help on a 
> product, and the majority of people actually coming to file a bug 
> report (or track one) have some technical experience.
>
> In OOo, are the bugtrackers aimed at developers, end users, or a mix 
> of both?  And for the end users, do they mostly just submit reports to 
> the bugtracker, or do they actively use the other features in the 
> bugtracker?
>
> Thinking through how end users get support might help, because if 1) 
> some end users use the lists, and don't really use the bugtracker, 
> that's important to know, and 2) because if most end users really only 
> ever submit bugs (but not search/track them, other than to get 
> notified of their own bug), that is useful to know.
>
> ----
>
> In terms of ASF infrastructure, most other projects have/or/are 
> migrating away from Bugzilla (to simplistic and hard to get good 
> reports) over to JIRA (perhaps slow and complicated, but you can 
> usually get what you want out of it).  But either is a supported tool 
> at Apache.
>
> Note that if a project wants a custom JIRA or Bugzilla install, with 
> extra modules or something, that's possible to do - especially if the 
> project has some reliable volunteers that will assist in both 
> deploying and supporting the customizations.
>
> - Shane
>
> On 6/30/2011 11:53 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> I'd like to reopen this question,since I haven't seen a resolution.
>>
>> I'm hearing some proposing Bugzilla, because of familiarity and ease
>> of migration.
>>
>> I'm also hearing some say that JIRA is superior.
>>
>> I'm not really persuaded by either argument.  I wonder if we could
>> briefly drill down into this a bit more.
>>
>> 1) I read that the  OOo bugzilla has been customized.  Can anyone
>> explain the nature of the customizations?
>>
>> 2) In what sense if JIRA better?  IMHO all defect tracking systems
>> suck.  But I'm open to the possibility that some suck less.
>>
>> 3) On migration, would it be reasonable to attempt a sandboxed trial
>> migration of Bugzilla to JIRA, and let skeptics poke at it for a
>> while, to see if, for example, IDs are preserved, etc.?  Would that be
>> much work?  The easiest way to convince people that JIRA is possible
>> and reasonable might be to actually do it.
>>
>> 4) What are the downsides of Bugzilla?  If it is a supported option at
>> Apache, wouldn't that be the obvious choice?  I think we'd need to
>> make a good case for why an alternative would be better.  What are,
>> say, the top 3 things that JIRA would do better than Bugzilla?
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Dave Fisher<dave2wave@comcast.net>  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.06.2011 16:45, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>>>>> Hi *,
>>>>>
>>>>> (to moderators: I guess the list software used checks on Sender, not
>>>>> on From - so if you need to review this message, please add the 
>>>>> sender
>>>>> address to a "allowed posters" lists for both dev and notifications
>>>>> please)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Marcus 
>>>>> Lange<marcus.mail@wtnet.de>    wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would prefer Bugzilla, too. We have already migrated recently 
>>>>>> to this, so
>>>>>> transition would be much easier to bring it into Apache. And 
>>>>>> because of
>>>>>> OOo's project size I would also like to see a new instance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not because of project size, but also for the sake of preserving the
>>>>> issue-numbers that are spread all over the place, last but not least
>>>>> in the code itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> So whatever you choose, make sure that there is a way to get form
>>>>> #i1234# to the actual bug that corresponds to the id.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, keeping issue ids is the most important thing. Which bug 
>>>> tracker we use would be a second order priority for me.
>>>
>>> There seems to be consensus.
>>>
>>> (1) We must somehow preserve the old bugzilla ids.
>>>
>>> (2) There is no clear preference on Bugzilla over JIRA.
>>>
>>> I think that we need to ask the infrastructure team what they think 
>>> about the situation.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>


Mime
View raw message