Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Bugzilla proposal: change some fields to better suit our need

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:55:13 +0200
On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 09:46:19AM +0200, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> >I don't think that this makes too much sense: We should just have the release
> >versions and SVN. Otherwise we end up with way too many versions. And while there
> >is a difference whether the bug is in svn 112345 or 112347 it doesn't matter
> >whether a release has been made in between. We need the exact svn version anyway.
> >  
> >
> Well, if there's a way to *edit* this field, than this would be the
> right thing. But it is currently not and I don't know if this can be
> changed in bugzilla.
> 
> Having a drop-down list with *every* subversion might not be a good
> idea, this list could become *very* long.

No, what I want: just select svn. Then enter the exact version in the Text.
I don't see any other feasible way.

> >>We could have a new type field or put that info into the severity field.
> >>There's an "enhancement" entry already, but "patch" and "support" are
> >>still missing, so:
> >>
> >>Remove some of the current Severity entries? (Major / Normal / Minor
> >>might just be enough)
> >>
> >>Add a Type field (completely new field): Bug / Feature Request / Support
> >>Request / Patch
> >>
> >>or mix this info all into the severity field?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I think just one field (i.e. severity) is enough. I'd propose 
> >
> >Security
> >Crash/Hang
> >Bug
> >Documentation
> >Featurerequest
> >  
> >
> I would think, having a "Patch" option might be a good idea. This way,
> we can handle the patches more efficiently than today, and just won't
> forget them (which we sometimes do).

Ah, now I understand. Good idea!

> IMO the Documentation is a component of Ethereal and not a severity thing?!?

This makes me rethink the component stuff again. On second thought I don't think
it's necessary to do this component stuff at all. Will most users know what to
fill in? Do the developers need this? In case you haven't noticed: I'm a fan of
as few fields as possible :-)

 Ciao
     Joerg
-- 
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.