Severity isn't really the same as a desire to have a bug fixed.

Personally I think the voting should be similar to Ohloh's ranking. You get 50 points which are split among all your votes. This allows all points to be used for voting, and you can add weight to your votes by voting less. But that is more of a feature request for bugzilla...

On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Steve Schveighoffer <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bugs have a severity field.? I'd say use that.

-- 
Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. ? - George Bernard Shaw

Bugzilla allows this already.  We just need to decide how to configure it.  Setting it to 100 votes with up to 100 per bug is just a matter of setting those two values.

I'm more concerned about us actually using that to weigh heavily in what gets fixed.

On Dec 8, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Jesse Phillips <jesse.k.phillips at gmail.com> wrote:

> Severity isn't really the same as a desire to have a bug fixed.
>
> Personally I think the voting should be similar to Ohloh's ranking. You get 50 points which are split among all your votes. This allows all points to be used for voting, and you can add weight to your votes by voting less. But that is more of a feature request for bugzilla...
>
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Steve Schveighoffer <schveiguy at yahoo.com
> > wrote:
>> Bugs have a severity field.  I'd say use that.
>
> -- 
> Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.
>   - George Bernard Shaw
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

The P1-P5 thing? Never knew which is most severe :o).

Andrei

On 12/8/10 1:10 PM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
> Bugs have a severity field. I'd say use that.
>
> -Steve
>
>
>     *From:* David Simcha <dsimcha at gmail.com>
>     *To:* Discuss the phobos library for D <phobos at puremagic.com>
>     *Sent:* Wed, December 8, 2010 4:04:34 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: [phobos] Upping the number of bugzilla votes from 10
>     to 100
>
>     If we want a more analog system, I'd say give every user 100 votes
>     and allow more than one to be used on a single bug. This way, bugs
>     that are a huge PITA can can be given a lot of votes and ones that
>     are a little annoying can be given a few, instead of each user
>     having to make an all-or-nothing decision.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

On 12/8/10 1:58 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> Bugzilla allows this already. We just need to decide how to configure it. Setting it to 100 votes with up to 100 per bug is just a matter of setting those two values.
>
> I'm more concerned about us actually using that to weigh heavily in what gets fixed.

Great! Then could you please do that? Say e.g. allocate 50 points for now. I don't think it does any harm, and it does take time for statistics to accumulate.

Andrei

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> On 12/8/10 1:58 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> > Bugzilla allows this already. We just need to decide how to configure it. Setting it to 100 votes with up to 100 per bug is just a matter of setting those two values.
> > 
> > I'm more concerned about us actually using that to weigh heavily in what gets fixed.
> 
> Great! Then could you please do that? Say e.g. allocate 50 points for now. I don't think it does any harm, and it does take time for statistics to accumulate.
> 
> Andrei

I don't think we have concensus (or even a majority) that suggests moving forward.  I think it does do harm.  I think it suggests that we pay attention to votes, when reality suggests more strongly that we don't.

Fix the behavior first, imho.

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Brad Roberts wrote:

> I don't think we have concensus (or even a majority) that suggests moving forward.  I think it does do harm.  I think it suggests that we pay attention to votes, when reality suggests more strongly that we don't.
> 
> Fix the behavior first, imho.

Summary so far:

yes
 Andrei Alexandrescu

alternate suggestion
 David Simcha

no
 Brad Roberts
 Jesse Phillips
 Steve Schveighoffer
 Don Clugston

On Wednesday, December 08, 2010 15:03:43 Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Brad Roberts wrote:
> > I don't think we have concensus (or even a majority) that suggests moving forward.  I think it does do harm.  I think it suggests that we pay attention to votes, when reality suggests more strongly that we don't.
> > 
> > Fix the behavior first, imho.
> 
> Summary so far:
> 
> yes
>  Andrei Alexandrescu
> 
> alternate suggestion
>  David Simcha
> 
> no
>  Brad Roberts
>  Jesse Phillips
>  Steve Schveighoffer
>  Don Clugston

I definitely like the idea of increasing the number of votes and making it possible to apply multiple votes to a bug. I definitely have more than 10 bugs that I'd like to vote on. But I do agree that there's little evidence that highly voted bugs get fixed. I don't think that I've ever had a bug that I've voted on fixed. And if the votes don't actually mean anything, then I'm not sure that there's much point in using them.

So, I like the idea of increasing the vote count, but if it doesn't affect what gets fixed, then perhaps it would be better to just get rid of the voting entirely. Based on votes, I would have expected stuff like the fact that Object isn't const-correct to have been fixed ages ago. But there are a number of bugs which have been around for quite a while which have a number of votes on them and yet never get fiixed.

- Jonathan M Davis

On 12/8/10 3:25 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 08, 2010 15:03:43 Brad Roberts wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Brad Roberts wrote:
>>> I don't think we have concensus (or even a majority) that suggests moving forward.  I think it does do harm.  I think it suggests that we pay attention to votes, when reality suggests more strongly that we don't.
>>>
>>> Fix the behavior first, imho.
>>
>> Summary so far:
>>
>> yes
>>   Andrei Alexandrescu
>>
>> alternate suggestion
>>   David Simcha
>>
>> no
>>   Brad Roberts
>>   Jesse Phillips
>>   Steve Schveighoffer
>>   Don Clugston
>
> I definitely like the idea of increasing the number of votes and making it possible to apply multiple votes to a bug. I definitely have more than 10 bugs that I'd like to vote on. But I do agree that there's little evidence that highly voted bugs get fixed. I don't think that I've ever had a bug that I've voted on fixed. And if the votes don't actually mean anything, then I'm not sure that there's much point in using them.
>
> So, I like the idea of increasing the vote count, but if it doesn't affect what gets fixed, then perhaps it would be better to just get rid of the voting entirely. Based on votes, I would have expected stuff like the fact that Object isn't const-correct to have been fixed ages ago. But there are a number of bugs which have been around for quite a while which have a number of votes on them and yet never get fiixed.

The idea is to indeed have votes affect what is being worked on; otherwise I wouldn't bother you all. My problem is that I now must pawn votes from some bug to another. But the larger issue is that with few votes per user and many opened bugs we have essentially a bimodal distribution, whereas with more votes per user we have a longer, smoother tail, which is more informative.

I don't really understand the stiff opposition to this. This is not the time and the place to criticize the past and present of our process, but instead to take steps to improve it. Part of improving the process, now that fixing bugs is a major focus, is to figure out a good ranking function for bugs. And I believe that increasing the number of votes per user would contribute to that. Could we please push this through? Let's make it happen.


Thanks,

Andrei

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> On 12/8/10 3:25 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 08, 2010 15:03:43 Brad Roberts wrote:
> > > On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Brad Roberts wrote:
> > > > I don't think we have concensus (or even a majority) that suggests
> > > > moving
> > > > forward.  I think it does do harm.  I think it suggests that we pay
> > > > attention to votes, when reality suggests more strongly that we don't.
> > > > 
> > > > Fix the behavior first, imho.
> > > 
> > > Summary so far:
> > > 
> > > yes
> > >   Andrei Alexandrescu
> > > 
> > > alternate suggestion
> > >   David Simcha
> > > 
> > > no
> > >   Brad Roberts
> > >   Jesse Phillips
> > >   Steve Schveighoffer
> > >   Don Clugston
> > 
> > I definitely like the idea of increasing the number of votes and making it
> > possible to apply multiple votes to a bug. I definitely have more than 10
> > bugs
> > that I'd like to vote on. But I do agree that there's little evidence that
> > highly voted bugs get fixed. I don't think that I've ever had a bug that
> > I've
> > voted on fixed. And if the votes don't actually mean anything, then I'm not
> > sure
> > that there's much point in using them.
> > 
> > So, I like the idea of increasing the vote count, but if it doesn't affect
> > what
> > gets fixed, then perhaps it would be better to just get rid of the voting
> > entirely. Based on votes, I would have expected stuff like the fact that
> > Object
> > isn't const-correct to have been fixed ages ago. But there are a number of
> > bugs
> > which have been around for quite a while which have a number of votes on
> > them
> > and yet never get fiixed.
> 
> The idea is to indeed have votes affect what is being worked on; otherwise I wouldn't bother you all. My problem is that I now must pawn votes from some bug to another. But the larger issue is that with few votes per user and many opened bugs we have essentially a bimodal distribution, whereas with more votes per user we have a longer, smoother tail, which is more informative.
> 
> I don't really understand the stiff opposition to this. This is not the time and the place to criticize the past and present of our process, but instead to take steps to improve it. Part of improving the process, now that fixing bugs is a major focus, is to figure out a good ranking function for bugs. And I believe that increasing the number of votes per user would contribute to that. Could we please push this through? Let's make it happen.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andrei

I guess a big part of my resistance is the past, so I'll try to set that asside for a moment.  Let's look at the real statistics:

total open bugs: 2186
bugs with at least one vote: 328 (15%)

votes  num bugs
  0    1858
  1    120
  2    59
  3    17
  4    6
  5    7
  6    4
  7    3
  9    1
 10    1
 12    2
 13    1
 16    2
 17    1
 19    2
 22    1
 42    1

What sort of curve are you looking for?  What percentage of bugs with votes?

On 12/8/10 4:30 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> total open bugs: 2186
> bugs with at least one vote: 328 (15%)
>
> votes  num bugs
>    0    1858
>    1    120
>    2    59
>    3    17
>    4    6
>    5    7
>    6    4
>    7    3
>    9    1
>   10    1
>   12    2
>   13    1
>   16    2
>   17    1
>   19    2
>   22    1
>   42    1
>
> What sort of curve are you looking for?  What percentage of bugs with votes?

I'm hoping for a larger percentage of voted bugs and a smoother decay from the most voted bug to the least voted. Increasing the points available to each voter might improve both.


Andrei