Types of things submitted to Bugzilla
| Type | With patch? | Suitable for Bugzilla? | Comments |
| “xyz doesn't work for me” | N | N | nothing to do here |
| “xyz doesn't work for me” | Y | Y | needs peer-group triage |
| update | N | N | nothing to do here |
| update | Y | Y | needs maintainer triage |
| regression | N | Y | needs bugbuster triage |
| regression | Y | Y | needs developer triage |
| request for new feature | N | not really | nothing to do here |
| request for new feature | Y | Y | needs developer triage |
more brainstorming
Phabricator
Phabricator tends to have a higher percentage of patches. However, its search capabilities are less than that of Bugzilla. Thus, it is somewhat more difficult for bug triagers to identify low-hanging fruit.
Phabricator does not have the added-on “maintainer” concept that we have added to Bugzilla. So, it is very difficult to triage for “maintainer timeout”. (and, in some cases in src, it should not apply.)
miscellaneous
It's absurd to think that any one person could look at a list longer than 20-30 items at any one time.
possibly a checklist format?
doc/ports/src
- [X] patch?
- [X] if so, from an upstream?
- [X] has an interested committer?
src-specific
- [X] existing code?
- [Y]:
- [X] regression
- [X] new functionality
- [X] code cleanup/refactoring
- [X] robustness
- [X] performance
- [X] interoperation
- [X] virtualization
- [X] other failure (actual bug):
- [X] crash/hang/panic
- [X] failure to boot
- [X] failure to detect device
- [N]:
- [X] new feature (new code)
- [X] hardware-specific?
- [X] motherboard/chipset/timers?
- [X] disk/drivers?
- [X] network?
- [X] bus-related? (USB, PCI, …)
- [X] serial/drivers?
- [X] power-related?
- [X] src but not hardware-specific
- [X] kernel/libraries?
- [X] userland?
- [X] toolchain?
- [X] makefile glop?
- [X] testing?