Cimballi suggested something interesting : there are several kind of contributors. At least bug reporters, as he presented himself,
and plain contributors (the ones who follow the Contributors Best Practices).
We could add this distinction in Contributors Best Practices with a 1st paragragh including some advices, like David's 3 points
below.
Then, by refering to it, we will not have to repeat it over and over, we should get better and consistent bug reports (easier to
read since they would follow some kind of rules), me may enhance the paragragh with experience, etc.
We may even hope that by reading such bug reports in the ML users may even not need to be told how to report bugs (examples works
great in real life, an OFBiz is a great example of that :o)
And finally this is flexible enough for less involved users
My 2cts
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <
[hidden email]>
> On May 29, 2009, at 11:39 PM, Cimballi wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I was starting to think I was crazy :-)
>
> Don't think you're crazy... just think that maybe you didn't provide enough detail... ;)
>
> Bug reports are important and welcome, and as you can see people take them seriously even when things aren't clear. Part of the
> problem is that OFBiz is a big system and without adequate detail it's easy to do something completely different that what you
> did.
>
> To help make them clear you might try including the following:
>
> 1. what you did (including detailed steps to reproduce, with URLs, field names, exact quotes of labels, etc)
> 2. what you expected to happen
> 3. what actually happened (again including exact quotes of error messages, etc)
>
> -David
>
Locked
