Mail bug report to list was implemented a while ago, and there was very
little other process around for it to match. This has since changed
considerably... I think its well over due for some serious
consideration, and maybe even replacement. 

For example, if we make the BFAV part of the full image, then suddenly
the user has a bug database right on his machine, and we might be able
to show him similar bugs... which might even include a solution. Also
note that the bug report contents themselves were optimized to be viewed
in a mail client. Nowadays, it might be smarter to include a full (or
limited, but deep) stack with lots of levels of variable contents, in a
structured format, in an attachment, so that tools (and people) can look
with all the depth they want at a bug. Heck, some bugs might even be
serializable - packed in a format that allows someone to continue
debugging them on a remote machine using an image segment or something
like that.

In short, plenty to improve in the bug report department, and it could
provide pretty significant improvements in bug-squashing efficiencies,
at all stages of the process.

Of course, changing the default subject to "I should describe the bug
I'm reporting in my own words HERE" could be a nice start ;-)

Daniel Vainsencher

Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> wrote:
> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 12:00:22 -0500
> From: Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com>
> Subject: Re: Consider Changing the Subject of Bug Reports (was	Re: [BUG]UndefinedObject(Object)>>error:)
> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> envelope-to: danielv at localhost
> delivery-date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 20:20:24 +0300
> reply-to: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 11:06, Doug Way wrote:
> > >...  Perhaps something should be added to the UI for bug
> > >report sending to suggest this so it will more likely to be considered
> > >at the point in time where it matters.
> > >  
> > >
> > 
> > I think this is probably the only way to really prevent this problem 
> > from happening in the future.  Hm, what would we automatically add to 
> > the subject to make it unique?  We could just tack on the sender's email 
> > name to the subject, or maybe the date, or a unique ID...  Actually, I 
> > think the date would be least offensive and most useful.  So the subject 
> > would show up as something like "[BUG] UndefinedObject(Object)>>error: 
> > 6-3-04".
> > 
> > Ooh, although maybe the Squeak version + update number would be more 
> > useful (and usually unique)... "[BUG] UndefinedObject(Object)>>error: 
> > from Squeak3.7beta-5923"
> 
> Frankly, I would personally prefer a UI where the user is requested to
> fill in the subject and it is not filled in for them at all.  The tags
> can be added afterwards so it is recognized appropriately.  Both in an
> email client and more importantly in BFAV2 it's very very helpful if the
> subject is more communicative than any automatically generated subject
> would likely be.  I've been frustrated many many times now by bug
> reports that include nothing more than the debug log with no comments
> about what the user was trying to do.  The UI should encourage the
> reporter to provide information that would be difficult if not
> impossible for Squeak to provide itself.  My 2 cents.
> 
> Ken
> 
> > 
> > Either way, this should be a pretty simple enhancement if someone wants 
> > to submit it...
> > 
> > - Doug
> > 
> 
> [signature.asc]