ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Kiwinote <kiwinote@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi everyone,

In order to better understand these importances, I will attempt to clarify
some of the importances I chose. Hopefully this will lead to a better
understanding.

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Brian Curtis <bcurtiswx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Kiwinote <kiwinote@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> 5b. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/530187
>>
>  I don't understand why you assigned yourself to the bug report here since
> Gary Lasker fixed it.
>
(I did actually fix this one.)

>  5c. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497109
>>
>  Since it's a usability issue, I think this is more of a low importance bug
> then medium.
>
Ok, although usability is something that very much has the focus in
software-center. I would have chosen the importance medium because I would
not expect an user to find trial software in the 'free software' category.
Especially with paid software coming in later versions of software-center,
it is a good thing that this bug has been resolved. But indeed this does
only affect a small fraction of the packages.

> 5d. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/542892
>>
>  A cosmetic/usability issue that does not limit the functionality of an
> application = Low Importance. Not medium
>
Ok, though this bug does actually break functionality. It means packages
like this cannot be installed through software-center. Once again it only
affects a small fraction of the packages.

> I notice that only two of the above need the desired importance, so here
>> are a few more bugs chosen to demonstrate deciding importances.
>> - low: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514859,
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/425850
>> - medium: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514874,
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514846
>> - high: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/514875,
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/528051
>>
>  514875 - you said high, but it's only medium
>
Don't really agree on this. One very common use case of software-center is
to remove software. (Software-center replaces gnome-app-install, which was
called "Add/Remove software" in the menu.) In the main menu of
software-center there are two items, 'get software' and 'installed
software'. If one wants to remove software it is hard to explain why the
software isn't listed under 'installed software'. I could agree with this
being wishlist though.

>  528051 - you said high, but it's only wishlist
>
Yes, this is a feature request, so strictly speaking it should be wishlist.
This feature request is however the only simple way to fix a major issue,
namely that 31000 items are being displayed in a list view. Firstly this
takes about 8-10 seconds to load, so many users will give up, thinking that
software-center has frozen. A small week ago this took about 25 seconds, but
recent updates have diminished this time. There is also no way to browse the
list as the items are not in a visible alphabetical order (strictly speaking
they are in alphabetical order of package name). Scrolling lags
significantly. I myself believe that this would be sufficiant reason to set
this as high importance rather than wishlist.

>  514874 - you said medium, but it's only low
>
This I could probably agree with. But although it is a minor issue, it does
affect all packages in main and restricted. Software-center is giving wrong
information in all these cases. I chose medium because although this is a
small issue, it is relatively simple to fix, and will benefit all users.

> 514846
>
 This would be similar to the case above. It is very noticeable and makes
the difference between a good first impression and a bad one.

> low importance bugs
>
It is probably clear that these are indeed low importance.

> Im going to say -1 because you are very close, but there are still things
> you should probably improve upon.  Don't hesitate to contact me on
> #ubuntu-bugs in freenode IRC if you want any help.
>
Ok, thanks for taking a look. It would be nice to hear from you whether my
choices make more sense with detailed explanations though.

Looking back over my reasonings and comparing it to wiki/Bugs/Importance I
think I can draw a few conclusions. I seem to give an increased importance
to bugs that are small, but affect all users. This could be considered in
line with the aims of software-center. I am furthermore choosing importances
based on the current set of software-center bugs and importances in
Launchpad, rather than strictly following the guidelines for importance. I
do think that this is better for software-center itself, but can see that it
leads to a decrease in consistency throughout Ubuntu. This is a consequence
of software-center in Ubuntu being the upstream.

Please let me know what you think about this.

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:45 PM, C de-Avillez <hggdh2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Kiwinote -- please repropose with a better selection of bugs showing

your skills on triage, and I will review it happily.

If it is not an issue to reapply straight away, then I will happily try and
make a selection that fits the guidelines better. However, I will wait for
some responses on the above first.


Once again, please feel free to let me know if you disagree with any of the
above.

Thanks a lot,
Kiwinote