Potential vs Confirmed Bugs

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

May I suggest using a bug tracker? There are some open source versions out there and they have multiple advantages:
For example Dwarf Fortress uses the Mantis Bug tracker https://www.mantisbt.org/, which is amazing and has many features a simple forum thread does not have:

• Ability to search for bugs easily.
• Ability to mark bugs as confirmed, solved, duplicate, WAI, etc.
  
• Ability to easily categorise bugs into Typos, crashes, display bugs, gameplay bugs, unintuitive behaviour, missing features, etc.
  
• They provide multiple fields that need to be filled when reporting the bug, such as version number, reproducible status, etc. This standardises bug reports.
  
• Ability to have comments on a specific bug, without having to search for them across multiple pages.
  

(see their bug tracker in action here: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/my_view_page.php)
This simplifies reporting and fixing bugs immensely:

• Bug reporters can search for existing duplicate bug reports without looking though dozens of pages.
  
• Moderators can close WAI bug reports, duplicates, stuff that is caused by decimal separator, so steve doesn't have to deal with it.
• Steve can concentrate on bugs that are flagged as confirmed.
  
• Players can see persisting bugs easily and can work around them.
  

Everybody wins.

Thanks for the suggestion, but all of the above is assuming that players follow those rules. As many players don't follow the request at the start of the bugs thread, or read known issues or read the change log, then I cannot be confident they would use the above software as intended. I need the simplest solution that works. Bugs threads have worked fine for many years and the only issue is the amount of non-bug posts in recent days. If moderators can filter those, it would work fine.

[SpaceMarine]

I have already sent my PM to you for the application of helping moderate the threads required, hopefully you got it as I cannot see it in my sent messages, Anyway I feel the system suggested previously with moderators filtering out the non bugs/not confirmed into one pile and the confirmed into others and being able to move those around accordingly, I think this will allow steve to focus on the more important bugs across the board.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I have already sent my PM to you for the application of helping moderate the threads required, hopefully you got it as I cannot see it in my sent messages, Anyway I feel the system suggested previously with moderators filtering out the non bugs/not confirmed into one pile and the confirmed into others and being able to move those around accordingly, I think this will allow steve to focus on the more important bugs across the board.

Yes, received thanks. I'll set this up later today.

[Migi]

May I suggest using a bug tracker? There are some open source versions out there and they have multiple advantages:
For example Dwarf Fortress uses the Mantis Bug tracker https://www.mantisbt.org/, which is amazing and has many features a simple forum thread does not have:

• Ability to search for bugs easily.
• Ability to mark bugs as confirmed, solved, duplicate, WAI, etc.
  
• Ability to easily categorise bugs into Typos, crashes, display bugs, gameplay bugs, unintuitive behaviour, missing features, etc.
  
• They provide multiple fields that need to be filled when reporting the bug, such as version number, reproducible status, etc. This standardises bug reports.
  
• Ability to have comments on a specific bug, without having to search for them across multiple pages.
  

(see their bug tracker in action here: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/my_view_page.php)
This simplifies reporting and fixing bugs immensely:

• Bug reporters can search for existing duplicate bug reports without looking though dozens of pages.
  
• Moderators can close WAI bug reports, duplicates, stuff that is caused by decimal separator, so steve doesn't have to deal with it.
• Steve can concentrate on bugs that are flagged as confirmed.
  
• Players can see persisting bugs easily and can work around them.
  

Everybody wins.

Thanks for the suggestion, but all of the above is assuming that players follow those rules. As many players don't follow the request at the start of the bugs thread, or read known issues or read the change log, then I cannot be confident they would use the above software as intended. I need the simplest solution that works. Bugs threads have worked fine for many years and the only issue is the amount of non-bug posts in recent days. If moderators can filter those, it would work fine.

I think the intention of the bug tracker would be for approved bug posters.

I do have a question, are bug thread moderators expected to reproduce the bugs?

[Cosinus]

Thanks for the suggestion, but all of the above is assuming that players follow those rules. As many players don't follow the request at the start of the bugs thread, or read known issues or read the change log, then I cannot be confident they would use the above software as intended. I need the simplest solution that works. Bugs threads have worked fine for many years and the only issue is the amount of non-bug posts in recent days. If moderators can filter those, it would work fine.

Even if people do not follow the rules, the moderators can easily delete or close those reports and you can simply look at confirmed ones.
In a forum setting there are no required fields when submitting a bug report, so bug reports will be even less uniform.

I agree that it is more work to set it up, but this work only needs to be done once and can probably be assigned to the volunteer bug moderators. Dwarf Fortress worked with a bug report forum just like this one for years, but now I don't think they would ever go back to that. The advantages are a benefit for everyone.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I agree that it is more work to set it up, but this work only needs to be done once and can probably be assigned to the volunteer bug moderators. Dwarf Fortress worked with a bug report forum just like this one for years, but now I don't think they would ever go back to that. The advantages are a benefit for everyone.

At work, several teams in my department uses JIRA for analytics requests and we also use Confluence for IT projects, so I am familiar with the type of software involved. I avoid them personally because my experience has been that they create a bureaucratic wall between the stakeholders and the delivery department, but if the various teams believe they can make it work I am not going to stand in their way. I always deal direct with people by email or instant chat because it works better for me and that personal connection helps a lot I need their help. My philosophy is always the least amount of process necessary to get the job done.

I am hoping that the moderator concept will keep communication flowing in an easy way but enable me to spend my own time more effectively. I'm not trying to make Aurora players into professional testers - I just need a low process approach that can handle the fact they are not.

[Randy]

Only suggestion to add is that the confirmed bugs thread(s) be readable by all, but only editable by the moderators. That way people can easily see what is a known bug - and either provide additional details, or at least avoid reposting the same thing without knowledge of the existing condition. (Well at least for those that do try to reponsibly report bugs...)

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Only suggestion to add is that the confirmed bugs thread(s) be readable by all, but only editable by the moderators. That way people can easily see what is a known bug - and either provide additional details, or at least avoid reposting the same thing without knowledge of the existing condition. (Well at least for those that do try to reponsibly report bugs...)

Erik, is that possible?

[Yezarul]

At work, several teams in my department uses JIRA for analytics requests

I know when I was doing QA work for 5th Planet Games back in the day that we operated on JIRA as well.  I only know the QA portion of it with submitting the JIRA request, I'm not sure how it works on the other end, but I'll trust your judgement on not operating it.
The good thing about doing it on the forums is that it is easy to setup and will be easy to see how beneficial it is.

I think what you are mainly looking for is people to just clean up the clutter of what is already a known bug and WAI and to save you the headache of going through it yourself yeah? As Migi said, having the mods test things is a question, as they can't help troubleshoot things in the DB from dev point of view.

The way I'm thinking is you just want the clutter removed so you can focus on what is important to you rather than having to respond to what is essentially constantly yeah?
I think just a clear structure will sort people out as well.  By having a format (that you already request) they can easily transcribe things after they look at them, but some things might not be apparent.  Perhaps a discord channel for the bug team would be beneficial so they can seek clarity from yourself/other mods that might be in the know as well.

v/r

[Resand]

I can't be the first to have thought of this, but just to make sure.
Now that Steve isn't "spamming" the bug thread with "fixed" posts, we're going to need a more proper list of fixed bugs with upcoming releases.
If for no other reason then being able to test the result.

[Erik L]

Only suggestion to add is that the confirmed bugs thread(s) be readable by all, but only editable by the moderators. That way people can easily see what is a known bug - and either provide additional details, or at least avoid reposting the same thing without knowledge of the existing condition. (Well at least for those that do try to reponsibly report bugs...)

Erik, is that possible?

I can make it globally visible, yes.

[Tikigod]

One of the things I hope anyone considering offering to be a 'Bug Mod' takes into account is to put aside familiarity with VB when assuming how Aurora should work when deciding what is a confirmed bug or not.... though not really sure how this would actually be done properly without actually requiring open sanity checking discussion on the forum covering how C# should be behaving with input from Steve where needed to clear up uncertainty..... which ends up just taking up more time from Steve short term until we're all up to speed on the specifics of C# with VB assumptions put aside.

There is already a fair bit of assumption 'answers' going around to newcomers to Aurora who are picking up C# as their first ever version of Aurora, and there have been occasions of newcomers have been given incorrect or partially inaccurate information because information from over familiarity with VB is taking priority over actually checking out specific C# differences, would suck to see some of that carrying over to deciding if something is working as intended or not.

[thashepherd]

FWIW I run a software team in my day job that works with Jira, and I'm happy to help out if that is selected - but I'd recommend something more lightweight. Maybe a shared Trello. As Steve sort of implied, the tool is irrelevant. Ideally something with an API is picked since we'd love to support automated bug reports via AuroraLoader.

[Zincat]

I can make it globally visible, yes.

That would really help us players, so we can see what is beign fixed from one version to the next

[Bughunter]

About WAI or not. In cases where this is not certain I think we should pass it on to Steve as long as the bug report meet other criteria. He is the ultimate and as I see it only authority on such things. If we can filter out the ones where he already answered in the past we still save a lot of his time here compared to before.