On 5/29/05, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Setting aside for the moment that GCC is a software package *targetted* at > developers, and hence the above is not necessarily a serious problem, I > agree that the Bugzilla interface isn't exactly my favorite UI. However, > I haven't figured out a better one either, so I don't have a firm platform > on which to stand and complain. > > Bug reporting interfaces appear to be a hard problem.
Then I would like you to review and contrast GCC Bugzilla (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla) with at least two others: Mozilla's (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org) and Redhat's (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/index.cgi). Mozilla's is a bit more organized than GCC's (but not much) and it is organized as a two-column page with a resonably lucid, short and sweet explaination on the right. It shares the same ant picture with GCC's, which makes me wonder if that image isn't part of some core page that comes with the Bugzilla package. The best of the two is the Redhat page. Instead of lots of controls on the page, it has one to start with (search for a bug), with the more detailed (and powerful) options located at the top of the page as menu items. It's also good in that it has both expository information on the page as well as news that someone looking for bugs might want to read. The only problem with the Redhat page is that its news section is somewhat dated. And yes, I know that Redhat is a 'real' company and that the designer(s) are probably paid. It would be interesting to ask if Redhat could provide some gcc site support. And if bugzilla is not working out, or if you want some ideas on how to build better interfaces, there seem to be plenty of open bug tracking packages on Sourceforge. A quick search for bugzilla produces a nice long list, and at random I picked phpBugTracker (http://phpbt.sourceforge.net). > Well, unless you have some user interface designers lined up and > volunteering to help, this isn't really the most useful thing to say. GCC > is a volunteer project; it uses the labor that it has available. And I understand and appreciate that. But when the UI heavy hitters aren't beating your doors down you either have to appeal to them in the coummunity or else go and do what I do; look at what's out there and (re)use design elements. I know that there's got to be somebody out there doing good volunteer UI work. For example, I look at the Savannah project (http://savannah.gnu.org) which is at the least reasonably organized and easy to read. Then there's Fedora (http://fedora.redhat.com) and Gentoo (http://www.gentoo.org). I'm sure there're others. As I mentioned before, have you thought to ask for help from Redhat? If everybody looks to gcc as an important core tool, then perhaps those power users could help with the site. I would say to go and talk to Apple, that paragon of UI design, but I have no idea how Apple would react or if it would be a complete waste of time and energy. > > You just need to be willing to put in the effort to look a little more > > professional and polished. > > The people maintaining the GCC web site put a great deal of effort into > it. If there is a problem, lack of effort isn't the cause of it. Maintenence is not design. And when that maintenence is the last thing you do after everything else, it shows. What triggered this diatribe was the apparent hard-core attitude that the GCC bugzilla (warts and all) was the way it was and it was going to stay that way, so live with it. You can't have that kind of an attitude with the site or the tool. You've pointed out the lack of bandwidth to improve it, and I am sympathetic (believe me, I really am). However, if someone makes a comment on the look and feel of the site then you should make the diplomatic equivalent to the comment "do you have a patch" when someone makes a comment about some "questionable" issue with the compiler. > You seem to be arguing that the people maintaining the web site have the > wrong skill set to do a good job at it. Personally, the site looks great > to me, but then I'm a developer, so... :) However, this is all just noise > on a mailing list in the absence of someone with different ideas who is > willing to do the work, just as with any other part of GCC. The people do have the wrong skill set. And let me be the first to tell you that when it comes to truly creative design, I suck. I would certainly be willing to help someone who doesn't suck. > If you feel there is a better way to do the web site, propose patches, > volunteer to help maintain it, and demonstrate why it's better. Just like > with the rest of GCC. If you don't have time to do that, you could try to > convince someone else to do it, or you could pay someone to do it. Just > like with the rest of GCC. In the absence of such a contribution, you > (and the web site) are at the mercy of the people who *are* willing to put > the effort into it. OK. Let's see where we go with that thought. > Personally, I think they're doing a great job. But maybe I just have a > tin eye for web site design too -- it's certainly possible. I'm not > prejudging your argument that the web site could be better, just saying > that saying so on the mailing list isn't going to do anything towards > changing it. I think we all suffer from Tin Eye Site Design - TESD. But if we don't bring this issue up here, then where should it be brought up?
