recently i inadvertently created some noise in the bug reporting/tracking system. i had run into an ICE after using '__MODULE__' in a certain way. before reporting the bug, i did enter '__MODULE__' in the search mask of the tracking system but got no hit. so i thought it was a new issue and reported it. turns out this bug was reported before and the issue was resolved 2 weeks ago. what i did not know then (but found out now) was that after the 0-hit search i should have clicked the innocent looking 'edit search' link, which is actually an 'advanced search' feature - then latest* i would have realized that the default search excluded resolved issues, activated them, and then found out about the issue being reported and resolved already.

i think it is an easy pit to fall into, at least for first time reporters. i'd like to suggest some improvements to the tracking interface:

1 'edit search' should be 'advanced search' as it is the standard name for this
2a make the default search to include resolved issues or
 b even let the 'report new bug' link direct to the advanced search already or
 c put up a brief explanation how ppl have to search the database properly before reporting a bug

i felt sorry for having wasted my time with reporting a resolved issue and even worse of course for having wasted some developer's time for straightening the records.
 /det


* yes, the default search results list which bug statuses were included in the search and that 'resolved' or 'closed' was not among them...but it is so easy to overlook something that is not there...

On Saturday, 3 August 2013 at 23:30:12 UTC, captaindet wrote:
> recently i inadvertently created some noise in the bug reporting/tracking system. i had run into an ICE after using '__MODULE__' in a certain way. before reporting the bug, i did enter '__MODULE__' in the search mask of the tracking system but got no hit. so i thought it was a new issue and reported it. turns out this bug was reported before and the issue was resolved 2 weeks ago. what i did not know then (but found out now) was that after the 0-hit search i should have clicked the innocent looking 'edit search' link, which is actually an 'advanced search' feature - then latest* i would have realized that the default search excluded resolved issues, activated them, and then found out about the issue being reported and resolved already.
>
> i think it is an easy pit to fall into, at least for first time reporters. i'd like to suggest some improvements to the tracking interface:
>
> 1 'edit search' should be 'advanced search' as it is the standard name for this
> 2a make the default search to include resolved issues or
>  b even let the 'report new bug' link direct to the advanced search already or
>  c put up a brief explanation how ppl have to search the database properly before reporting a bug
>
> i felt sorry for having wasted my time with reporting a resolved issue and even worse of course for having wasted some developer's time for straightening the records.
>  /det
>
>
> * yes, the default search results list which bug statuses were included in the search and that 'resolved' or 'closed' was not among them...but it is so easy to overlook something that is not there...

First of all, don't worry about having caused trouble for others here. I'm sure that was not a big deal at all.

Now, this kind of thing happens when the bug is fixed, but the fix is not released yet. IMHO, the right thing to do, would be to start using CLOSED. The meaning would be:
RESOLVED = The fix is in git, but not in any release yet.
CLOSED = A release has been made that contains the fix.
The default search should then include RESOLVED issues, but not CLOSED ones.

On 2013-08-03 18:29, captaindet wrote:
> recently i inadvertently created some noise in the bug
> reporting/tracking system. i had run into an ICE after using
> '__MODULE__' in a certain way. before reporting the bug, i did enter
> '__MODULE__' in the search mask of the tracking system but got no
> hit. so i thought it was a new issue and reported it. turns out this
> bug was reported before and the issue was resolved 2 weeks ago. what
> i did not know then (but found out now) was that after the 0-hit
> search i should have clicked the innocent looking 'edit search' link,
> which is actually an 'advanced search' feature - then latest* i would
> have realized that the default search excluded resolved issues,
> activated them, and then found out about the issue being reported and
> resolved already.
>
> i think it is an easy pit to fall into, at least for first time
> reporters. i'd like to suggest some improvements to the tracking
> interface:
>
> 1 'edit search' should be 'advanced search' as it is the standard
> name for this 2a make the default search to include resolved issues
> or b even let the 'report new bug' link direct to the advanced search
> already or c put up a brief explanation how ppl have to search the
> database properly before reporting a bug
>
> i felt sorry for having wasted my time with reporting a resolved
> issue and even worse of course for having wasted some developer's
> time for straightening the records.
>
> /det
>
>
> * yes, the default search results list which bug statuses were
> included in the search and that 'resolved' or 'closed' was not among
> them...but it is so easy to overlook something that is not there...

i just realized the the actual entry point for the issue tracking, i.e.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues
is much more helpful/useful than the bug reporting link put on the dlang 'bug tracker' webpage  ( http://dlang.org/bugstats.php ), i.e.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/enter_bug.cgi?product=D
with the latter, as far as i can see, being the only link from dlang to the issue tracker. weird. i think dlang should link to the overview page of the issue tracker (first of the two links above).

/det

On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 20:44:07 UTC, captaindet wrote:
> i just realized the the actual entry point for the issue tracking, i.e.
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues
> is much more helpful/useful than the bug reporting link put on the dlang 'bug tracker' webpage  ( http://dlang.org/bugstats.php ), i.e.
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/enter_bug.cgi?product=D
> with the latter, as far as i can see, being the only link from dlang to the issue tracker. weird. i think dlang should link to the overview page of the issue tracker (first of the two links above).
>
> /det

Enter a bug report :)

On 2013-08-05 15:53, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 20:44:07 UTC, captaindet wrote:
>> i just realized the the actual entry point for the issue tracking, i.e.
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues
>> is much more helpful/useful than the bug reporting link put on the dlang 'bug tracker' webpage ( http://dlang.org/bugstats.php ), i.e.
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/enter_bug.cgi?product=D
>> with the latter, as far as i can see, being the only link from dlang to the issue tracker. weird. i think dlang should link to the overview page of the issue tracker (first of the two links above).
>>
>> /det
>
> Enter a bug report :)

done ;)