Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Francois Gouget
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Kai Blin wrote: [...] > If you feel the need to insult people for whatever reason, don't do it > on the mailing list. Better yet, they should do it to the mirror. -- Francois Gouget http://fgouget.free.fr/ Before you criticize someone, walk a mile

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Austin English
Guys, please take it off list. -- -Austin

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>> From almost the first response, the tone was quite condescending > No. Here we go. I'll try again. Yes. >If professionalism means never giving up, even when it has been >*explained* to you why your idea won't work in practice, then you >succeeded. In the end someone did explain, yes. But it

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Ben Klein
2009/5/11 Nicklas Börjesson : > From almost the first response, the tone was quite condescending No. > and no one even considered if my ideas had any actual merit at > all before slamming them completely. Yes they did. You ignored their just criticism. > Also, because of this, the > conversatio

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
> +1, exactly why I muted the conversation. Not implying that I would have "won" the conversation or anything (I obviously didn't), but I did not like the way my arguments were met at all. >From almost the first response, the tone was quite condescending and no one even considered if my ideas h

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Austin English
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Henri Verbeet wrote: > 2009/5/11 Kai Blin : >> I seriously dislike the tone this mailing list keeps taking recently. > In case it means anything to anyone, I agree. +1, exactly why I muted the conversation. -- -Austin

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Henri Verbeet
2009/5/11 Kai Blin : > I seriously dislike the tone this mailing list keeps taking recently. In case it means anything to anyone, I agree.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-11 Thread Kai Blin
On Sunday 10 May 2009 15:59:30 Ken Sharp wrote: Ken, some food for thought here. > Henri Verbeet wrote: > > When you're not subscribed to the list, your posts have to go through > > moderation. Sometimes that can take a while. > > So the idiot isn't even subscribed to this group, but is spamming

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-10 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>So the idiot isn't even subscribed to this group, but is spamming it anyway? >Don't feed the trolls. Hi there. I would have a hard time replying to your posts if I weren't, wouldn't you think? //Nicklas

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-10 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>make sure you're sending >mails with the same address you're receiving them on. That would be it, thanks! I feel pretty silly, I had registered to the mailing list as nicklas_at_ws.se, but my sender is my long adress, nicklas.borjesson_at_ws.se. It did not use to be that way, I forgot that it h

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-10 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>When you're not subscribed to the list, your posts have to go through >moderation. Sometimes that can take a while. I do subscribe to the list(and did, from the beginning). Or maybe subscription is more than registering to the mailing list?

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-10 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>I don't believe your earlier mains have been resent. I certainly >haven't received them. Ok, then it's ok. I was afraid that there was something wrong.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-10 Thread Ken Sharp
Henri Verbeet wrote: When you're not subscribed to the list, your posts have to go through moderation. Sometimes that can take a while. So the idiot isn't even subscribed to this group, but is spamming it anyway? Don't feed the trolls.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-09 Thread Henri Verbeet
2009/5/9 Nicklas Börjesson : >>When you're not subscribed to the list, your posts have to go through >>moderation. Sometimes that can take a while. > > I do subscribe to the list(and did, from the beginning). > Or maybe subscription is more than registering to the mailing list? > You also need to f

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-08 Thread Henri Verbeet
2009/5/9 Remco : > 2009/5/9 Ben Klein : >> Still not your problem? Still feeling bullied, but this time by the >> mailing list server? >> >> I don't believe your earlier mains have been resent. I certainly >> haven't received them. > > My Gmail account tells me that all those mails are like 4 days

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-08 Thread Remco
2009/5/9 Ben Klein : > Still not your problem? Still feeling bullied, but this time by the > mailing list server? > > I don't believe your earlier mains have been resent. I certainly > haven't received them. My Gmail account tells me that all those mails are like 4 days old. This has happened to m

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-08 Thread Ben Klein
een to anything I have said, > but rather to things I haven't said. You've been repeatedly informed why your proposed changes to the severity levels are a bad idea by many people on this list. Let's take an analogy: Imagine you're a fresh, young car tester at Ford. Using an ope

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-08 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
Hi all, it seems that some of my earlier mails(and some other) has been re-mailed to the list. I don't think that our(here, at my workplace) servers has done this, rather, it feels like the mailing list server did it. So understand that I am not bombarding the list. I see that many are replying

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-08 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>No offense, but you should probably take the lack of (repeated) >responses as a sign. I did leave it alone. That post was a reaction to what I considered as bullying. The answers has almost never been to anything I have said, but rather to things I haven't said. //Nicklas PS. No, I am new to t

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread James McKenzie
IneedAname wrote: > > Wine does have meta bugs look at the application data base. Each application > has a list of bugs that effect that program. > I think that you missed what a meta-bug is in the Bugzilla sense. A meta-bug would collect all of the applications affected by a particular proble

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Ben Klein
. I've said it before, you're one man against the world in this argument. >> Bugzilla is a developer's tool, with bugs reported by users. Severity >> levels are there for how they affect Wine *overall*, not the user >> experience. Such things belong in the AppDB/e

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread richardvo...@gmail.com
one, I want to talk to someone else. > > No offense, but you should probably take the lack of (repeated) > responses as a sign. > > You've been answered several times by several people, and the answer > has been (mostly) the same. > > Bugzilla is a developer's tool,

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Austin English
should probably take the lack of (repeated) responses as a sign. You've been answered several times by several people, and the answer has been (mostly) the same. Bugzilla is a developer's tool, with bugs reported by users. Severity levels are there for how they affect Wine *overall*, n

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>However, a developer should be aware of the impact on the user experience and >the user's determined severity of a problem. That has been my point all the time. I was told that the users perceptions were not important since, a least according what I understood, they could not be trusted to be

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>Guys, y'all are going in a circular argument. No need to cc wine-devel >on it anymore. I am rather fed up with it as well, also I will soon not have any more time for it since I'll be going back to work tomorrow. I've had stomach flu(!swine) the last week. Circular? More plain disagreement i'd

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread IneedAname
On Sun, 3 May 2009 23:31:45 -0400 Mike Kaplinskiy wrote: > +1. Or just remove priorities for users altogether. Looks like some one is thinking round here! That gets my vote to.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread IneedAname
On Mon, 4 May 2009 22:12:04 +1000 Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/5/4 Ben Klein : > > Then they disappear. There would be no way to search for metabugs, for > > example, whereas at the moment you can search for Blockers. There's no > > point in keeping metabugs if there's no > > SUSPENSE! > > Lost a

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
places for user-side >severity (which is what you're suggesting). By definition, there is no >way to gather statistics on one when the other is used. a) You are right. Keep them users out of there. b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was severity for the u

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
"minor" to "medium" and "normal" to "high". *ducks* //Nicklas -Original Message- From: wine-devel-boun...@winehq.org on behalf of Rosanne DiMesio Sent: Mon 2009-05-04 13:39 To: Austin English Cc: wine-devel@winehq.org Subject: Re: Severity levels On Mon,

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
As I wrote in my earlier post, Austin told me about the voting functionality, and If that is considered when priorities are made, it is likely to keep things pretty on track, making my proposed changes far less important. I still think my thoughts aren't that off anyway, but now they feel a bit mo

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
rt. Yes the voting! I had forgot about that! Actually that pretty much...lessens many of my previous arguments. Well, turns the into moot, really. I still think that the severity levels could be better with regards to UE though, but that seems less important now with the at least theorethical

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>>> How many times does this have to be repeated? Severity levels are NOT >>> determined by how much a user wants the app to work. They're just not, >>> deal with it. >> >> I have never said it is, either. >> I said it think it should be det

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
ant would be doing this. Good thing I didn't propose that then. :-) I said it should be a part of the priority and a considerable one. Not the largest one. And I am not talking about users arbitrary priorities, just including more intuitive severity levels(good or bad) when making bug fixing priorities. //Nicklas

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>How many times does this have to be repeated? Severity levels are NOT >determined by how much a user wants the app to work. They're just not, >deal with it. I have never said it is, either. I said it think it should be determined by how severe the user thinks it is(if devs th

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Ken Sharp
em, the issue really is critical. At least they think that. Give people the benefit of the doubt here. How many times does this have to be repeated? Severity levels are NOT determined by how much a user wants the app to work. They're just not, deal with it. It doesn't matter wh

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
a lot of money out of them one way or another. >This is a FOSS project and has no bearing on severity levels. So Photoshop has not been the least prioritized? I don't think you paint the entire picture. >If a set of devs decide to work on getting a particular app working >tha

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>So you suggest making the severity ratings meaningless to anyone but >... well, you don't actually mention anyone knowing what they *really* >mean, but I assume an exclusive clique of developers or bugzilla >admins? Users have different opinions on what level of bug they >encounter depending on wh

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-07 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
severity level. If Photoshop(the eternal example) should stop working on windows due to a regression, I am sure the users would consider it critical when they report it to Microsoft. But as the wine project progresses, severity levels will hopefully drop so that there will be more nuances.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread Ben Klein
2009/5/5 Paul TBBle Hampson : > I've got a whole bunch of bugs linked from Warhammer Online which have > really unuseful bug titles, causing readers of the page to end up > reporting the same things in the comments. Bug titles can and should be changed. 2009/5/6 James Mckenzie : > Since the sever

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread Rosanne DiMesio
On Tue, 5 May 2009 13:28:45 -0400 (EDT) James Mckenzie wrote: > The proposed impact field should be a drop down list only and present common > impacts encountered by users, such as "Unable to Install Application", > "Unable to run application","Screen is unreadable","Text not appearing on > s

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread James Mckenzie
Darragh Bailey wrote on May 5th: > >On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 11:24:58AM -0700, James Mckenzie wrote: >> Ben Klein wrote on May 4th: >> > >> >Final post from me. >> > >> >2009/5/5 Nicklas Börjesson : >> >> b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was >> >> severity for the users

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread Austin English
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Darragh Bailey wrote: > In catching up on this long discussion, this is the first post that I've > seen that actually comes close to pin-pointing what is being requested. > > Current: > Severity = messure of bug impact on wine > > Requested: > Severity = message of

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread Darragh Bailey
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 11:24:58AM -0700, James Mckenzie wrote: > Ben Klein wrote on May 4th: > > > >Final post from me. > > > >2009/5/5 Nicklas Börjesson : > >> b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was > >> severity for the users. > > > >Nope. Both for the benefit of deve

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-05 Thread Paul TBBle Hampson
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 02:39:28PM -0500, Austin English wrote: > 2009/5/4 James Mckenzie : >> One question:  Does Bugzilla have a place for user's to place the >> Impact on their ability to use a Windows program?  This is much >> different than the priority and severity fields. > No, but it is no

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread John Klehm
Roderick Colenbrander and I were talking about the severity levels on irc the other day. We tried to outline the existing severity process that seems to be in use (not what is neccesarily listed in bugzilla) and came up with the following levels of bug severity: * normal * major (release level

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Austin English
2009/5/4 James Mckenzie : > Ben Klein wrote on May 4th: >> >>Final post from me. >> >>2009/5/5 Nicklas Börjesson : >>> b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was >>> severity for the users. >> >>Nope. Both for the benefit of developers, hence why they're both on bugzilla. >>

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Ken Sharp
James Mckenzie wrote: One question: Does Bugzilla have a place for user's to place the Impact on their ability to use a Windows program? This is much different than the priority and severity fields. Yes, here: http://bugs.winehq.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_severity

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread James Mckenzie
Ben Klein wrote on May 4th: > >Final post from me. > >2009/5/5 Nicklas Börjesson : >> b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was >> severity for the users. > >Nope. Both for the benefit of developers, hence why they're both on bugzilla. > > One question: Does Bugzilla have

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Ben Klein
Final post from me. 2009/5/5 Nicklas Börjesson : > b) I thought that priority was developer priority and severity was > severity for the users. Nope. Both for the benefit of developers, hence why they're both on bugzilla.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Austin English
Guys, y'all are going in a circular argument. No need to cc wine-devel on it anymore. Let's work toward making normal the default level, and move on with our lives. Any developer/user focus for bugzilla argument is WAY beyond beating a dead horse. -- -Austin

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Paul TBBle Hampson
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 10:12:04PM +1000, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/5/4 Ben Klein : >> Then they disappear. There would be no way to search for metabugs, for >> example, whereas at the moment you can search for Blockers. There's no >> point in keeping metabugs if there's no > There's no point in keep

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Ben Klein
2009/5/4 Ben Klein : > Then they disappear. There would be no way to search for metabugs, for > example, whereas at the moment you can search for Blockers. There's no > point in keeping metabugs if there's no SUSPENSE! Lost a chunk of line there. There's no point in keeping metabugs if there's n

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Ben Klein
everity (which is what's in place now); forums and AppDB are the places for user-side severity (which is what you're suggesting). By definition, there is no way to gather statistics on one when the other is used. >>ill-defined > I would go further than I'll-defined. I'd sa

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-04 Thread Rosanne DiMesio
On Mon, 4 May 2009 00:31:09 -0500 Austin English wrote: > > > > But how would the restriction work? Not that I'm likely to ever submit > > a Major or Critical bug report, but I know what they mean ;) > > > > I don't know if bugzilla supports that or not. > > But changing the default to normal

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Austin English
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Ben Klein wrote: > 2009/5/4 Austin English : >> 2009/5/3 Rosanne DiMesio : >>> What I would suggest is making the default severity normal rather than >>> enhancement, as that's what's appropriate in most cases anyway (and there's >>> already a bug report, 13363,

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ben Klein
2009/5/4 Austin English : > 2009/5/3 Rosanne DiMesio : >> What I would suggest is making the default severity normal rather than >> enhancement, as that's what's appropriate in most cases anyway (and there's >> already a bug report, 13363, suggesting just that), and perhaps allowing >> users to

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Austin English
2009/5/3 Rosanne DiMesio : > What I would suggest is making the default severity normal rather than > enhancement, as that's what's appropriate in most cases anyway (and there's > already a bug report, 13363, suggesting just that), and perhaps allowing > users to lower the severity if they want.

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Rosanne DiMesio
> > > > Let's try user education.  You only get to choose normal and we get to > > up/downgrade until you can prove that you know how to do it right.  This > > is how some companies do it. > > > > James McKenzie > > > > +1. Or just remove priorities for users altogether. > I think you mean seve

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Mike Kaplinskiy
2009/5/3 James McKenzie : > Ken Sharp wrote: >> >> >> Nicklas Börjesson wrote: >> >>> I think that the users should have quite a say with regards to how >>> important a bug is, because for every user putting in the >>> (considerable for a user) effort of reporting a bug, there are dozens >>> that d

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread James McKenzie
Ken Sharp wrote: > > > Nicklas Börjesson wrote: > >> I think that the users should have quite a say with regards to how >> important a bug is, because for every user putting in the >> (considerable for a user) effort of reporting a bug, there are dozens >> that don't say anything at all. > > To ev

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ben Klein
d that aren't critical on the developer's side. >>>Wine can't stop development on _everything_ just to get one user's >>>application running. Making user's arbitrary priorities the most >>>important would be doing this. >> >> Good thi

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ben Klein
ns on what level of bug they >>encounter depending on what *task* they're trying to perform, which is >>not particularly useful to developers who need strict reproducability. > > No, I mean that the actual meaning of the words "low", "medium", "high&q

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Austin English
ment on _everything_ just to get one user's >>application running. Making user's arbitrary priorities the most >>important would be doing this. > > Good thing I didn't propose that then. :-) > I said it should be a part of the priority and a considerable one. Not

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ken Sharp
Nicklas Börjesson wrote: How many times does this have to be repeated? Severity levels are NOT determined by how much a user wants the app to work. They're just not, deal with it. I have never said it is, either. I said it think it should be determined by how severe the user think

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ken Sharp
IneedAname wrote: On Sun, 03 May 2009 18:10:03 +0100 Ken Sharp wrote: That would be the "Show Apps affected by this bug" link then. http://appdb.winehq.org/viewbugs.php?bug_id=16281 Thanks I missed that so how but my first point still stands. Not really. 16281 certainly isn't a major

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Austin English
rtant. > Currently they are either: > 1.Completely disregarded or > 2. If they follow the instruction(where "commons sense" is not mentioned), > they're forced to adhere to severity levels that distort or hide their > opinion of the problem. And for each user reporti

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ken Sharp
FOSS project and has no bearing on severity levels. If a set of devs decide to work on getting a particular app working that's up to them, and we've already been over this too. But as the wine project progresses, severity levels will hopefully drop so that there will be more nuances. As

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ken Sharp
IneedAname wrote: On Sat, 2 May 2009 16:52:06 +0200 Nicklas Börjesson wrote: 3. Major"Major loss of functionality for a wide range of applications - Isn't this just all bugs that has more than $arbitrary_number of applications linked to them? An aggregate, rather than a level? In

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>I disagree. When first introduced to them, I found the severity levels >to be suitably vague to make me read the definitions. Once I read >them, it was clear to me what each level means. Suitably? Do you mean that the severity levels are the way they are to make people read their de

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
veloper, so I have no problems with these things. I can patch like there is no tomorrow, given time. What I am talking about the fact that the ordinary users priorities are very important. Currently they are either: 1.Completely disregarded or 2. If they follow the instruction(where "comm

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread IneedAname
On Sat, 2 May 2009 16:52:06 +0200 Nicklas Börjesson wrote: > 3. Major "Major loss of functionality for a wide range of applications > > - Isn't this just all bugs that has more than $arbitrary_number of > applications linked to them? An aggregate, rather than a level? In that case #16281

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ken Sharp
Nicklas Börjesson wrote: I think that the users should have quite a say with regards to how important a bug is, because for every user putting in the (considerable for a user) effort of reporting a bug, there are dozens that don't say anything at all. To every Wine user, their application n

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ben Klein
2009/5/3 Nicklas Börjesson : > >>I disagree. When first introduced to them, I found the severity levels >>to be suitably vague to make me read the definitions. Once I read >>them, it was clear to me what each level means. > > Suitably? Do you mean that the severity lev

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Ben Klein
;Out of you and her, I don't think her credibility can be called in to >>question. And before you ask, I'm also an AppDB admin, I package the >>Debian packages for WineHQ, and have had a patch committed to Wine. >>I'll even send you the git revision code if you can't

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Austin English
2009/5/2 Nicklas Börjesson : >>> 2. Critical  "Critical problem that prevents all applications from working" >>> >>> - Possible, if everyone stopped testing code completely, and also unlikely >>> to be reported by a user. > >>No, critical bugs are usually opened by non-Linux users. > > Here I did

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
ll even send you the git revision code if you can't find it! :D >Note that like Rosanne, even when I was a newbie submitting bug >reports, I understood the severity levels because I read the >descriptions. The descriptions are fine as is, with the possible >exception of "Bl

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>I think "middle-aged college English teacher who couldn't code if her life >depended on it" counts as non-technical. :-) The only thing that sets me >>apart from most users is the fact that I actually do RTFM, but that's just >because I'm one of those eccentric academics who thinks reading is

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>The problem is, however, that many of those problems only break an >application or two. What is a blocker for Photoshop isn't a blocker >for World of Warcraft or Microsoft Office, for example. You mean because Photoshop often use the more obscure parts of the APIs? Otherwise bugs in GUI shouldn'

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
gh. 2. There are serious graphics problems, huge artifacts, the entire application is almost unworkable under Gnome. With the current severity levels(without common sense), example 1 gets higher priority, which I think is wrong. //Nicklas PS. Yes I know the actual issue turned out to be a configur

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
user-oriented. Non-technical? Posting on and following the wine-devel list? Severity levels perfectly clear? I must say, you've got some serious credibility issues.. :-) //Nicklas -Original Message- From: Rosanne DiMesio [mailto:dime...@earthlink.net] Sent: Sat 2009-05-02 19:

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
>Wine is meant to support _ALL_ windows applications. It doesn't give >priority to 'server' or 'desktop' applications (there is no >difference, really), but instead tries to make all of them work. Yes, but I wasn't talking about server applikations per se,

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
Ok, I have made better posts. >> 1. Blocker "Blocks development and/or testing work" >> >> - Is this even possible? >Yes. I am sorry. Of course it is possible to have these problems. I thought it meant that it blocks ALL development and/or testing work(since it is above critical). In the l

RE: Severity levels

2009-05-03 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
million desktops is the last number I've heard..and people are learning how to report problems. Hell, my mom(77 years old) reported a bug a while ago. My point is, why not adapt the severity levels to the competence level of the submitters instead of having to correct them all the time, cre

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Ben Klein
I really didn't think this one deserved even my comment, but here goes. 2009/5/3 Austin English : > 2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson : >> Current severity levels are perfect for server applications where everything >> is simply about functionality working or not working. >>

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Rosanne DiMesio
On Sat, 2 May 2009 21:08:23 +0200 Nicklas Börjesson wrote: > > Non-technical? Posting on and following the wine-devel list? Severity levels > perfectly clear? > I must say, you've got some serious credibility issues.. :-) > > I think "middle-aged college English

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Austin English
nctionality, it did not work. > Everything else works, though. > 2. There are serious graphics problems, huge artifacts, the entire > application is almost unworkable under Gnome. > > With the current severity levels(without common sense), example 1 gets higher > priority, whi

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Austin English
n't talking about server applikations per se, but that the > severity levels would be perfect for a server application, hence skewing the > priorities away from GUI and other, more "soft", user experience issues. I'm curious what non-gui applications you're talking about in regards to wine. -- -Austin

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Austin English
2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson : > Current severity levels are perfect for server applications where everything > is simply about functionality working or not working. > However, the overwhelming majority of windows applications in general, and > those being ported through wine in partic

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Rosanne DiMesio
> > This is way easier to understand for normal people. Speaking as a non-technical user who does file bug reports now and then, I have always found the definitions of the severity levels to be perfectly clear, even when I was new to Wine, and from what I've seen, when a report

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Ken Sharp
adoption rates increase. 10 million desktops is the last number I've heard..and people are learning how to report problems. Hell, my mom(77 years old) reported a bug a while ago. My point is, why not adapt the severity levels to the competence level of the submitters instead of having to correct

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Ken Sharp
The severity levels are there for guidance. I would hope that common sense would prevail, but clearly it doesn't. If a UI glitch makes a program unusable, then it's normal. I can not believe you need this pointing out to you. http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1347 "

Re: Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Jerome Leclanche
hould be renamed to "impact", or something that would present itself differently to a first-time user. Or add a second severity field. I don't know, not my call. 2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson : > Hi all! > > First, I couldn't find any list more suitable than this one to com

Severity levels

2009-05-02 Thread Nicklas Börjesson
Hi all! First, I couldn't find any list more suitable than this one to comment the severity levels in the bug reporting so I post it here. If this was a really bad thing to do, please tell me were to do so. Secondly, don't take this wrong, I am not here to preach, I actually think