ncoghlan at gmail.com
Fri Sep 24 16:42:56 CEST 2010
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>> > But we also have "performance", "crash", "resource usage"... Are we
>> > suggesting we devise a separate list box for each of these issue types?
>> I must admit, I've never actually found much use for those additional
>> options. If I'm flagging a bug I'll nearly always mark it "behaviour",
>> otherwise I'll mark the issue "feature request". The characterisation
>> of "what *kind* of bug is it?" is something that can usually be left
>> until later in the process.
> I have often used searches on "performance" or "resource usage" to find
> what was needing a review or a patch. I think it would be a mistake to
> remove those two categories.
That purpose would be served just as well by keywords though
(particularly since those attributes aren't mutually exclusive -
resource usage problems will usually *cause* performance problems, and
you may notice the latter first).
A generic "bug" classification would also better suit documentation
bugs. The simpler we can make the more common fields, while still
providing the essential information, the better. When someone like me
is looking at a field pondering what to set it to for a comparatively
simple issue report, what hope does someone submitted their first
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
More information about the Python-Dev