On 8/19/2010 12:34 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:02:35AM -0500, Jeremy Bopp wrote: >> A defect tracker should hopefully address such issues at least somewhat >> better than mail archives. Duplicate issues can be merged, issue owners >> can be more readily assumed to be able to provide the authoritative >> answers and solutions, resolved issues can be unambiguously closed, and >> detailed information such as package and Cygwin versions and affected >> Windows platforms can be recorded for quick reference when applicable. > > This seems like a terrible example to me. You seem to be expecting a bug > tracker will be used for technical support so that if someone is having > problems setting up openssh they will be walked through the problem in > the bug tracker. I'd actually expect that a user error would be closed > as "user error". And, subsequent reports of the problem would be closed > as "dup"s.
That's definitely one way that a maintainer could choose to operate on issues opened for his/her components; however, the first time such an issue is opened, the maintainer could also choose to elaborate upon the cause of the user error and/or offer an appropriate solution when the issue is closed as "user error". The maintainer might also refer to the appropriate entry in the mailing list history similar to what is frequently done now when the same question is asked to the mailing list for the umpteenth time. Future duplicates could indeed be closed as "dup"s without further comment. I admit that using a defect tracker as a general support forum is not exactly ideal, but it does give users some context with which to narrow their searches and measure the quality of the response or level of interest in solving the issue. Hopefully, the number of repeat "problems" goes down over time. If nothing else though, it should allow more technical people to clearly open real issues using the experience with defect trackers that more and more of them have. Of course the quality of the defect tracker is directly related to the effort the maintainers put in to keep it relatively pruned and organized. Maybe that is too much to expect for most maintainers at this time. On the other hand, maybe having the defect tracker option would lead to more community involvement. It wouldn't happen over night, but consistently directing people to the defect tracker would go a long way toward making the tracker valuable. As things currently stand, the mailing list option does not provide much to most people in the way of issue discovery, management, or tracking, even if it is great for discussions such as this. In any case, I just wanted to voice my support for using a defect tracker regardless of any arguments to do so. I'm already convinced that using one will be better. If you're not convinced, I don't think I have any evidence on hand to change your mind, and given the lack of popular support of this effort, perhaps you're right that a defect tracker still won't help Cygwin. -Jeremy -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
