The impending end of FC2 NEEDINFO bugs...

[Mike A. Harris]

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 5/25/05, Miloslav Trmac <mitr at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>>This is also abusing the bugzilla resolution status; if somebody
>>looks for a bug he is experiencing and finds it, he sees
>>"CURRENTRELEASE" when in fact it is "WE-WISH-IT-WERE-CURRENTRELEASE".
>>NOTABUG nor WONTFIX is perfect, but either provides more correct
>>information than CURRENTRELEASE.
> 
> 
> Mike has a very valid point though, perhaps the value of technically
> precise categorization is not as valuable as sloppier categorization
> that promotes a skewed happy-happy joy-joy perception and encourages a
> 'work with us' attitude.  Is the bugzilla database aiming to be a
> historical statitician's research treasure trove, or a medium by which
> developers and users attempt to communicate day-to-day, week-to-week?
> 
> I've seen too many users blow a fuse at seeing wontfix or notabug as a
> resolution to something they filed, souring them to the bug filing
> experience because they come away with a perception that their issue
> is being completely ignored.  Talking these potentially valuable
> contributors down from the ledge has become far less thrilling an
> experience over time.  Instead of continually tying to fix novice, 
> psychologically fragile perceptions of malicious intent of certain bug
> resolution states. it might be more effective to simply lie about the
> resolution state to encourage flow of information.   The terse
> language of the finite resolution namespace can be a bit harsh. If I
> ruled the world, I'd probably forcible dictate the creation of
> "RETEST" as a companion to "RESOLVED", so I could have "RETEST"
> "CURRENTRELEASE" for many of the situations Mike has described. legacy
> of course complicates the issue for security issues legacy claims
> interest in.

This very much hits the nail on the head.  When using the bugzilla
resolutions as documented in bugzilla, what I have learned is that
people often get very upset.  Nobody likes to be told "no", "go away",
WONTFIX, NOTABUG, etc.

Negative resolutions are just plain BAD.  Some might call it
pedantic word games, but the fact is that it is all about providing
a positive user/customer experience, and by utilizing positive and
proactive language, the same results can be achieved as telling
someone "NOTABUG" or "WONTFIX" without coming off as rude or
obnoxious, simply by preferring the more positive sounding
resolutions, with a polite comment.

Bugzilla really needs a "proactivity" facelift.

I used to use bugzilla's stock resolutions and the negative responses
from people really got to me.  It was hard NOT to take rude comments
personally, and respond as such.  That was not a particularly
enjoyable or useful experience.

The new approach is much more successful at reaching the goals
set forth by our subteam, and is also much appreciated by our
customers and users.

By following this approach, I rarely ever see negative comments
in bugzilla anymore after updating a bug and/or closing it.  So,
it works very well for me at least, and I hope others find it
useful too.