[Libreoffice-qa] bug tagging (was: Adding RTL Keyword)

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Mon Apr 2 10:05:29 PDT 2012

Hi Rainer,

(renaming this to "bug tagging" as my reply is not specific to RTL)

On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 01:48:16PM +0200, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:
> Here some more arguments against a change (by the moment)
> a) I can't see a real problem, so we should not change a running
>    system without need

Well, the reasons I would prefer this in whiteboard status in the long run is
- We should use a consistent way to tag bugs as far as possible, not some by
  summary, some by whiteboard status, some by keyword
- tagging in summary has drawbacks and scalability issues
- adding keywords is a hassle

So I have a strong preference to make it a generic rule to:

 - tag in keyword if available, otherwise tag in whiteboard status
 - tags in summary are just informal and nothing one should make queries from

> b) I do not deal you concern of using "RTL" in the Summary line. It's
>    directly related to the observations (only RTL, only .doc, or
>    similar), so I believe it's quite OK to have it in the summary line
>    We also use some other abbreviations and madeup words there like
>    FILEOPEN, RTF, UI, EasyHackSkills, ...

Its ok to have informal info additionally there. Its not a good idea to
suggest its a good idea to do this _instead_ of proper tagging in

> c) You can't add something to whiteboard during original report

Thats hardly an big issue: Whoever goes the extra mile to check out what kind
of tags exist (on the wiki), will not be bothered to much having to add it
directly after filing. Those who do not bother the first, likely wont bother
the second.

> d) Currently there is no whiteboard search within the Bugzilla
>    Assistant, whiteboard search results are not integrated into list of
>    possible DUPS

Ok, that is an issue.

> e) <https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details> and some
>    other (partly linked / related)pages would have to be modified.
> So I believe we should wait until someone has a problem, than we can
> work on a solution.

Well, there are only <50 open RTL bugs atm so there is not much to bother
about here for this specific case. What bothers me would be ending up with
different groups all using slightly different tagging (summary, whiteboard,
whatever) and a reporter needing to dig through endless wikipages on how this
is treated differently for each group of bugs. The above mentioned "generic
rule" would work, not only for RTL, but in fact consistently for all bug

So I am pushing for using whiteboard to prevent different groups to get used
to slightly different tagging methods, which will make things rather messy
and hard to clean up. This argument is one that does not apply specifically
to RTL, but to bug tagging in general.

> And I agree, tagging in the Summary line might be not a good idea;
> because of that I more and more agree with your ideas how to handle
> EasyHack abbreviations in Summary. I still would like to think about
> that a while, but I agree with the desired result to drop those
> "EasyHack" tags from the Summary.
> But I don't see "RTL" as a tag, but as an abbreviation for "right to
> left". So IMHO here is no discord.

Well, as an abbrevations there is indeed no objection. But as the
original mail by Shahar was asking about "adding a RTL keyword", I feel this
thread was about bug tagging and not abbrevations.

Anyway, independant from RTL we should find and normalize to a generic and
universally used way for bug tagging, not something done on an individual
base for each topic. Something for the next call, I guess. ;)



More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list