There’s a structured way of reading bug reports that can make your life easier. Drill down this checklist:
- Did the user tell us what went wrong?
- What did they expect?
- What exactly did they do?
- Did they provide the data we regularly ask during diagnostics (logs, version numbers etc)?
- Where did the issue happen (machine, specific software running on it etc -something that might influence us).
Basically your job is to maximise actionability, reduce the amount of stuff that other people re-reading the bug need to think about.
Things to think about:
- Does the original poster need to supply you with some particular details? Which?
- Is there a specific debugging step that needs to be undertaken? Are there particular questions that need looking into?
- Do we have a rough idea how to fix it?
We hope the process of filing away a bug is as self-explanatory as possible. If there’s anything unclear, these pages may help
We don’t have a notion of merging in roundup yet, so for now we set the new bug to ‘duplicate’ and point to the old bug with the superseder flag.
Sometimes users will re-open old bugs because they encounter the same error message. It’s probably a good idea to close these back and just create a new bug, see issue701, in particular http://bugs.darcs.net/msg7340 as this makes things rather difficult to follow.
Likewise if people are chatty and talk about more than one thing in the same bug, be sure to create new bug entries for each.
- mulander advice - Adam Wolk has kindly taken some time out to help us get better at bug tracking. Check out this discussion