You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com> on 2012/07/11 05:13:38 UTC
[QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Hi, all,
As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some advantages
and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
1)Set keywords in keyword item:
Advantage:
a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi you can get
corresponding defects info.
b)As a condition item when define query/search.
Disadvantage:
a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
result will not include this info.
2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
Advantage:
a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way you
get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
b)Flexible to definition according demands.
Disadvantage:
a)Can't make it as query condition.
3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
For QA or dev, which way is better for you?
Any comments are welcome.
--
Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Shan Zhu <sh...@gmail.com>.
Oh, it is okay, if there has been "ms_interoperability" already.
I talked about "interop_MSbinary" just wanted to tag all MSOffice
interoperability issues which can not be tagged by "interop_OOXML".
Now the "ms_interoperability" can do it well. So, no necessary to change
it.
Herbert, thanks a lot.
Regards,
Shan Zhu
2012/7/16 Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> On 13.07.2012 04:41, Shan Zhu wrote:
>
>> Perhaps, we can tag the interoperability issue about MSoffice2007 and
>> MSoffice2010 together using tag "interop_OOXML".
>>
>> 2 reasons:
>> 1. This type of issues ususally exist with files created in both of the
>> two
>> versions.
>> 2. For many sample files, especially files from the users or download from
>> website, we can not know exactly that which version of Office had been
>> used
>> to created/modified them.
>>
>
> These are good reasons and there was no opposing argument, so I assume
> that "lazy consensus" applies here: The new keyword was added.
>
>
> PS: Another question is which tag we should used to mark the issue found
>> in
>> .xls that created by MSoffice2007/2010, even the eariler Office versions.
>> "interop_ms2003" can not cover the issue in such a scenario. Using
>> "interop_MSbinary" instead ?
>>
>
> There is a keyword named "ms_interoperability" and 758 issues are already
> flagged with it:
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**buglist.cgi?keywords=ms_**
> interoperability<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?keywords=ms_interoperability>
> To make it and the new interop_OOXML symmetric and orthogonal again it
> should IMHO be renamed e.g. to interop_MSbinary. Is that what was meant?
>
> Herbert
>
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 13.07.2012 04:41, Shan Zhu wrote:
> Perhaps, we can tag the interoperability issue about MSoffice2007 and
> MSoffice2010 together using tag "interop_OOXML".
>
> 2 reasons:
> 1. This type of issues ususally exist with files created in both of the two
> versions.
> 2. For many sample files, especially files from the users or download from
> website, we can not know exactly that which version of Office had been used
> to created/modified them.
These are good reasons and there was no opposing argument, so I assume
that "lazy consensus" applies here: The new keyword was added.
> PS: Another question is which tag we should used to mark the issue found in
> .xls that created by MSoffice2007/2010, even the eariler Office versions.
> "interop_ms2003" can not cover the issue in such a scenario. Using
> "interop_MSbinary" instead ?
There is a keyword named "ms_interoperability" and 758 issues are
already flagged with it:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?keywords=ms_interoperability
To make it and the new interop_OOXML symmetric and orthogonal again it
should IMHO be renamed e.g. to interop_MSbinary. Is that what was meant?
Herbert
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Shan Zhu <sh...@gmail.com>.
Perhaps, we can tag the interoperability issue about MSoffice2007 and
MSoffice2010 together using tag "interop_OOXML".
2 reasons:
1. This type of issues ususally exist with files created in both of the two
versions.
2. For many sample files, especially files from the users or download from
website, we can not know exactly that which version of Office had been used
to created/modified them.
If a defect is related to only one version of them, we can declare it in
description.
PS: Another question is which tag we should used to mark the issue found in
.xls that created by MSoffice2007/2010, even the eariler Office versions.
"interop_ms2003" can not cover the issue in such a scenario. Using
"interop_MSbinary" instead ?
Just a suggestion, for your reference.
Regards,
Shan Zhu
2012/7/12 Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> On 11.07.2012 17:59, Ji Yan wrote:
>
>> Is there any easy way to add keyword? Raise request in mailing list? I
>> don't think it's efficient way. IMHO we need a mechanism/rule to let bug
>> reporter/QA/Dev to add keyword which doesn't appear in the list. Change it
>> to editable field?
>>
>
> In Bugzilla as of version 4.2 (which we are using) there is no easy way to
> add versions, milestones, components, products, extra fields, keywords,
> custom flags, etc. for anyone except for administrators.
>
> In my opinion the list of keywords should be limited. If there were more
> than e.g. a hundred keywords then their benefit would be lost. We should
> try to keep them "orthogonal": distinct and non-overlapping.
>
>
> BTW, I'd like to request adding following keyword to identify MS Office
>> file format issue:
>> MS 2003
>> MS 2007
>> MS 2010
>>
>
> That sounds like a reasonable request and if nobody objects I'll be happy
> to add them. There is already a keyword ms_interoperability though that
> overlaps. Eventually we should rename the requested keywords to
> interop_ms2003, interop_ms2007 and interop_ms2010 to show their main
> purpose of ensuring interoperability with other document processors.
>
> Herbert
>
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com>.
First, Thank you Herbert Duerr's reply.
Exactly, Put keywords in summary manually maybe have inconsistent with
keyword item.
If we can request to add keywords ,I think I agree to use keyword item in
query too. One way is easy to maintain.
So I think we need prososal Defect Reporter/QA to use keywords item widely.
I summary 2 points need to do from your reply:
1)Proposal to add keyword item in query. So need suggest add keyword item
when share query with others.
2)Rich keywords list as you demand. send mail to request help to add in
keywords list.
For point 2, I suggest to add "Dev" as keyword, to tag defects that report
from developer or not, that just mechanism or code change, can't verify
from user view.
2012/7/12 Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> On 11.07.2012 17:59, Ji Yan wrote:
>
>> Is there any easy way to add keyword? Raise request in mailing list? I
>> don't think it's efficient way. IMHO we need a mechanism/rule to let bug
>> reporter/QA/Dev to add keyword which doesn't appear in the list. Change it
>> to editable field?
>>
>
> In Bugzilla as of version 4.2 (which we are using) there is no easy way to
> add versions, milestones, components, products, extra fields, keywords,
> custom flags, etc. for anyone except for administrators.
>
> In my opinion the list of keywords should be limited. If there were more
> than e.g. a hundred keywords then their benefit would be lost. We should
> try to keep them "orthogonal": distinct and non-overlapping.
>
>
> BTW, I'd like to request adding following keyword to identify MS Office
>> file format issue:
>> MS 2003
>> MS 2007
>> MS 2010
>>
>
> That sounds like a reasonable request and if nobody objects I'll be happy
> to add them. There is already a keyword ms_interoperability though that
> overlaps. Eventually we should rename the requested keywords to
> interop_ms2003, interop_ms2007 and interop_ms2010 to show their main
> purpose of ensuring interoperability with other document processors.
>
> Herbert
>
--
Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 11.07.2012 17:59, Ji Yan wrote:
> Is there any easy way to add keyword? Raise request in mailing list? I
> don't think it's efficient way. IMHO we need a mechanism/rule to let bug
> reporter/QA/Dev to add keyword which doesn't appear in the list. Change it
> to editable field?
In Bugzilla as of version 4.2 (which we are using) there is no easy way
to add versions, milestones, components, products, extra fields,
keywords, custom flags, etc. for anyone except for administrators.
In my opinion the list of keywords should be limited. If there were more
than e.g. a hundred keywords then their benefit would be lost. We should
try to keep them "orthogonal": distinct and non-overlapping.
> BTW, I'd like to request adding following keyword to identify MS Office
> file format issue:
> MS 2003
> MS 2007
> MS 2010
That sounds like a reasonable request and if nobody objects I'll be
happy to add them. There is already a keyword ms_interoperability though
that overlaps. Eventually we should rename the requested keywords to
interop_ms2003, interop_ms2007 and interop_ms2010 to show their main
purpose of ensuring interoperability with other document processors.
Herbert
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>.
Is there any easy way to add keyword? Raise request in mailing list? I
don't think it's efficient way. IMHO we need a mechanism/rule to let bug
reporter/QA/Dev to add keyword which doesn't appear in the list. Change it
to editable field?
BTW, I'd like to request adding following keyword to identify MS Office
file format issue:
MS 2003
MS 2007
MS 2010
2012/7/11 Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> On 11.07.2012 05:13, Li Feng Wang wrote:
>
>> As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
>> But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some
>> advantages
>> and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
>>
>
> Thanks for starting the discussion!
>
>
> 1)Set keywords in keyword item:
>> Advantage:
>> a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**describekeywords.cgi<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi>you can get
>> corresponding defects info.
>> b)As a condition item when define query/search.
>> Disadvantage:
>> a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
>> b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
>> c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
>> result will not include this info.
>>
>
> Disadvantage-a is not so big: Do you have suggestions on what new keywords
> would be most required? We can easily add them. Having a reasonable and
> non-inflated list of keywords is certainly helpful.
>
> If you mention disadvantage-b then I suggest you look for the "Change
> Columns" link on one of your search-result pages and add the "keywords"
> from the "available columns" to the "selected columns". Then disable the
> checkbox for "for this search only" and press the "change columns" button
> => in the future all your queries will list the keywords next to the
> subject line.
>
> For disadvantage-c I suggest to adjust the queries to include the keyword
> if doing so improves the query
>
>
> 2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
>> Advantage:
>> a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way you
>> get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
>> b)Flexible to definition according demands.
>> Disadvantage:
>> a)Can't make it as query condition.
>>
>
> For avantage-a please see my answer above to disadvantage-b1: Option 1
> also makes it easily possible to see the keywords next to the subject lines
> in all your search results.
>
>
> 3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
>>
>
> Requiring that several fields have to be kept in sync manually is a
> classic recipe to create inconsistencies. I don't like inconsistent
> databases. If we could automate it there would not be such a problem, but
> with the change-columns approach the need for that is reduced somewhat.
>
> Herbert
>
--
Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 11.07.2012 05:13, Li Feng Wang wrote:
> As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
> But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some advantages
> and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
Thanks for starting the discussion!
> 1)Set keywords in keyword item:
> Advantage:
> a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi you can get
> corresponding defects info.
> b)As a condition item when define query/search.
> Disadvantage:
> a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
> b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
> c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
> result will not include this info.
Disadvantage-a is not so big: Do you have suggestions on what new
keywords would be most required? We can easily add them. Having a
reasonable and non-inflated list of keywords is certainly helpful.
If you mention disadvantage-b then I suggest you look for the "Change
Columns" link on one of your search-result pages and add the "keywords"
from the "available columns" to the "selected columns". Then disable the
checkbox for "for this search only" and press the "change columns"
button => in the future all your queries will list the keywords next to
the subject line.
For disadvantage-c I suggest to adjust the queries to include the
keyword if doing so improves the query
> 2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
> Advantage:
> a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way you
> get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
> b)Flexible to definition according demands.
> Disadvantage:
> a)Can't make it as query condition.
For avantage-a please see my answer above to disadvantage-b1: Option 1
also makes it easily possible to see the keywords next to the subject
lines in all your search results.
> 3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
Requiring that several fields have to be kept in sync manually is a
classic recipe to create inconsistencies. I don't like inconsistent
databases. If we could automate it there would not be such a problem,
but with the change-columns approach the need for that is reduced somewhat.
Herbert
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by Ji Yan <ya...@gmail.com>.
Definitely, adding keywords make defect searching easily. I suggest adding
the keyword to both keyword filed and tagging it in summary field.
2012/7/11 liu ping <do...@gmail.com>
> it seem that Advanced field in new defect page contain the keyword option
> :you can select the predefined keyword and also input self-definded keyword
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:35 AM, liu ping <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Good discussion.
> >
> > the third optinon ,+1
> >
> > In bugzilla ,advanced search already include the keyword and summary
> > qurey conditions
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Li Feng Wang <
> phoenix.wanglf@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, all,
> >>
> >> As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
> >> But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some
> >> advantages
> >> and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
> >>
> >> 1)Set keywords in keyword item:
> >> Advantage:
> >> a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi you can
> >> get
> >> corresponding defects info.
> >> b)As a condition item when define query/search.
> >> Disadvantage:
> >> a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
> >> b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
> >> c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
> >> result will not include this info.
> >>
> >> 2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
> >> Advantage:
> >> a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way
> you
> >> get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
> >> b)Flexible to definition according demands.
> >> Disadvantage:
> >> a)Can't make it as query condition.
> >>
> >> 3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
> >>
> >> For QA or dev, which way is better for you?
> >>
> >> Any comments are welcome.
> >> --
> >> Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
> >>
> >
> >
>
--
Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by liu ping <do...@gmail.com>.
it seem that Advanced field in new defect page contain the keyword option
:you can select the predefined keyword and also input self-definded keyword
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:35 AM, liu ping <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good discussion.
>
> the third optinon ,+1
>
> In bugzilla ,advanced search already include the keyword and summary
> qurey conditions
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi, all,
>>
>> As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
>> But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some
>> advantages
>> and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
>>
>> 1)Set keywords in keyword item:
>> Advantage:
>> a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi you can
>> get
>> corresponding defects info.
>> b)As a condition item when define query/search.
>> Disadvantage:
>> a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
>> b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
>> c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
>> result will not include this info.
>>
>> 2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
>> Advantage:
>> a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way you
>> get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
>> b)Flexible to definition according demands.
>> Disadvantage:
>> a)Can't make it as query condition.
>>
>> 3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
>>
>> For QA or dev, which way is better for you?
>>
>> Any comments are welcome.
>> --
>> Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
>>
>
>
Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Posted by liu ping <do...@gmail.com>.
Good discussion.
the third optinon ,+1
In bugzilla ,advanced search already include the keyword and summary qurey
conditions
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Li Feng Wang <ph...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> As QA, marking/tagging issues correspondingly is very useful.
> But I know, there is some way to use it in Bugzilla. I list some advantages
> and disadvantages about these ways, maybe not cover all.
>
> 1)Set keywords in keyword item:
> Advantage:
> a)From https://issues.apache.org/ooo/describekeywords.cgi you can
> get
> corresponding defects info.
> b)As a condition item when define query/search.
> Disadvantage:
> a)Not flexible to definition, need use keywords already defined.
> b)Not visual when get info from issues mail list(bugzilla)
> c)Some queries not include keyword item as condition, then query
> result will not include this info.
>
> 2)Add keywords in defect Summary/headline:
> Advantage:
> a)Visual to get keyword info from summary, no matter what's way you
> get defects, issues mail list or simple query.
> b)Flexible to definition according demands.
> Disadvantage:
> a)Can't make it as query condition.
>
> 3)Both add keywords/tags in keyword item and summary.
>
> For QA or dev, which way is better for you?
>
> Any comments are welcome.
> --
> Best Wishes, LiFeng Wang
>