Karl Ramberg wrote:
> 
> Andreas Raab wrote:
> > One of the things
> > that I'd like to achieve with a "real bugtracker" is to distinguish a
> > "random" bug report from an "orderly" one. Meaning that if people expect
> > bugs to be fixed they do need to put in a little extra effort besides just
> > pressing "mail out bugreport" in the debugger. Just a *little* help (say,
> > doing an initial classification of the bug into a specific package) would go
> > a long, long way here.
> 
> We should not be so far away from creating better bug reports.
> We could put the DecentReviewNotePad into the base image and modify it
> to
> get all this info into a bug report.
> I looked at the Mantis bug report form
> (http://mantisbt.sourceforge.net/mantis/bug_report_advanced_page.php)
Duh, you need username/password: reporter
> and modifying DRNP to do that kind of thing should not be hard.
> I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel here but it is very convenient to
> have all the tools in the image.
> 
> >
> > Another reason for wanting to have "orderly bug reports" is that it actually
> > gives us a target when we're out of beta - namely when no more bugs for that
> > particular version of Squeak remain open. This doesn't mean they have to be
> > fixed btw - it is perfectly reasonable to resolve some bug by saying we
> > won't fix it in this version. But having that tracker (and using it for this
> > purpose!) ensures that all of the problems are being looked at and resolved
> > some way or another for a particular release.
> 
> I agree that better bug reports would be a great help.
> 
> Karl