(CCing dev-quality to reach a broader audience -- please direct responses to dev-platform)
It has come to my attention that we lack a keyword in Bugzilla for when steps-to-reproduce are needed (a very common request). However, we do have keywords for when a testcase, regression range, or URLs are wanted. I find it to be extremely useful when someone requesting qawanted pairs it with a keyword indicating what is being requested. It's certainly more efficient then having to parse the comments to interpret the request.
Assuming support for such a keyword here are some proposed names:
* steps-wanted
* str-wanted
* needSTR
* need-steps
Would people find this keyword useful? If so, I can file a bug to get it added.
Thanks
Anthony Hughes
Quality Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
> (CCing dev-quality to reach a broader audience -- please direct responses to dev-platform)
> It has come to my attention that we lack a keyword in Bugzilla for when steps-to-reproduce are needed (a very common request). However, we do have keywords for when a testcase, regression range, or URLs are wanted. I find it to be extremely useful when someone requesting qawanted pairs it with a keyword indicating what is being requested. It's certainly more efficient then having to parse the comments to interpret the request.
> Assuming support for such a keyword here are some proposed names:
> * steps-wanted
> * str-wanted
> * needSTR
> * need-steps
> Would people find this keyword useful? If so, I can file a bug to get it added.
I think this would be useful, and improves workflow clarity along the
lines of dbaron's blog post yesterday.
> On 12-08-16 6:01 PM, Anthony Hughes wrote:
>> (CCing dev-quality to reach a broader audience -- please direct responses to dev-platform)
>> It has come to my attention that we lack a keyword in Bugzilla for when steps-to-reproduce are needed (a very common request). However, we do have keywords for when a testcase, regression range, or URLs are wanted. I find it to be extremely useful when someone requesting qawanted pairs it with a keyword indicating what is being requested. It's certainly more efficient then having to parse the comments to interpret the request.
>> Assuming support for such a keyword here are some proposed names:
>> * steps-wanted
>> * str-wanted
>> * needSTR
>> * need-steps
>> Would people find this keyword useful? If so, I can file a bug to get it added.
> I think this would be useful, and improves workflow clarity along the
> lines of dbaron's blog post yesterday.
>> * steps-wanted
> This is the most obvious of the options you gave.
> -r
-- Anthony Hughes
Quality Engineer
Mozilla QA (Desktop)
On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 18:01 -0700, Anthony Hughes wrote:
> It has come to my attention that we lack a keyword in Bugzilla for
> when steps-to-reproduce are needed (a very common request). However,
> we do have keywords for when a testcase, regression range, or URLs are
> wanted. I find it to be extremely useful when someone requesting
> qawanted pairs it with a keyword indicating what is being requested.
> It's certainly more efficient then having to parse the comments to
> interpret the request.
> Assuming support for such a keyword here are some proposed names:
> * steps-wanted
> * str-wanted
> * needSTR
> * need-steps
> Would people find this keyword useful? If so, I can file a bug to get it added.
This might be off-topic, but looking at keywords in general I see
* regressionwindow-wanted
* stackwanted
* needURLs (used once so far, maybe pretty new?)
(all of them describing $something *missing*, without a counterpart to
signal that $something is available), but also
* crashreportid
(describing $something *available*, without a counterpart to mark that
that $something is missing).
Are there specific reasons in teams' workflows that only either missing
or available $information can be queried for, and that the counterpart
is not needed to be queried for?
On Tue 28 Aug 2012 08:37:44 AM PDT, Andre Klapper wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 11:28 -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
>> On 2012-08-27 7:03 PM, Andre Klapper wrote:
>>> * needURLs (used once so far, maybe pretty new?)
>> Used all the time - it's just removed after the URLs are provided. :)
It only applies to crash reports that cannot be moved along by other means. It is needed because access to the url that a crash report gave is very limited.
