Mailing List Archive

The non-coder friendly weekend sprint: Check pre-1.17 bugs
This week, Sumana said she had some people who were interested in
looking at old bugs to see if they were still reproducible under 1.17.

I decided to steal this idea for a great weekend sprint that even people
who are not developers could take part in: Help me look at these bug
reports and see if the problems they describe are still reproducible or
if the problem has been fixed.

If you don't have a test wiki with 1.17 installed, then you can try to
reproduce a lot of these on Wikipedia in your user sandbox. If you
don't have one yet, you can use this link to load one: http://hexm.de/4w

If you come across one that you don't know how to reproduce in your user
sandbox or on your own wiki, then add the keyword “testme”.

With that out of the way, there are plenty of bugs to test. Here are a
few ways to find a good candidate for testing:

* There are currently 616 bugs that are explicitly filed against pre-1.17
versions of MediaWiki: http://hexm.de/4e

* If you modify the query to remove those bugs labeled “enhancement”,
you'll end up with 345 bugs: http://hexm.de/4j

* Some bugs just have “unspecified” as the version. There are 1747 MW
that were created before 2011-06-22 (1.17's release date) with
“unspecified” as the version number: http://hexm.de/4f

* Again, if you remove the ones labeled “enhancement”, you come up with
526 bugs: http://hexm.de/4g

You can do all sorts of things to reduce the list to nice bite-sized
chunks. Here, for example are smaller lists of bugs marked “normal” or
higher severity for each version of MW in bugzilla:

1.6.x (11 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4k

1.7.x (5 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4l

1.8.x (3 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4m

1.9.x (14 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4n

1.10.x (17 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4o

1.11.x (23 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4p

1.12.x (20 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4q

1.13.x (21 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4r

1.14.x (26 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4s

1.15.x (42 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4t

All 1.16 versions (94 bugs)
http://hexm.de/4v

I'm fascinated by the jump from 26 bugs version 1.14 to 42 bugs in
version 1.15 and then the big bounce to 94 bugs in 1.16 and think this
is a good area to dig into. I'm interested in *why* that is there,
whether it is because of more people checking, better reporting, or
(hopefully not) worse solving.

Of course, we still need people to look at the “testme” bugs, too:
http://hexm.de/4i

Finally, if you have followed the steps in the bug and can't reproduce
it, please mark it “FIXED”.

Comments are always helpful on the bugs, so leave one if you have a
question or comment about the bug.

Happy Testing!

Mark.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: The non-coder friendly weekend sprint: Check pre-1.17 bugs [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Mark A. Hershberger
<mhershberger@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I'm fascinated by the jump from 26 bugs version 1.14 to 42 bugs in
> version 1.15 and then the big bounce to 94 bugs in 1.16 and think this
> is a good area to dig into.  I'm interested in *why* that is there,
> whether it is because of more people checking, better reporting, or
> (hopefully not) worse solving.
>

If memory serves, we started to see an increase in the rate of bug
reporting sometime around late 1.14 / early 1.15. I'd be interested
to see the rate of incoming bugs graphed out, right now my evidence
is largely empirical.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: The non-coder friendly weekend sprint: Check pre-1.17 bugs [ In reply to ]
On 07/08/2011 07:47 PM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> Finally, if you have followed the steps in the bug and can't reproduce
> it, please mark it “FIXED”.

Actually, I think WORKSFORME is a better resolution here. FIXED implies
that we know we've taken specific action to fix the bug.

--
Sumana Harihareswara
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: The non-coder friendly weekend sprint: Check pre-1.17 bugs [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Sumana Harihareswara
<sumanah@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 07:47 PM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
>> Finally, if you have followed the steps in the bug and can't reproduce
>> it, please mark it “FIXED”.
>
> Actually, I think WORKSFORME is a better resolution here.  FIXED implies
> that we know we've taken specific action to fix the bug.
>

WORKSFORME or INVALID if we can prove it wasn't ever really
a bug to begin with. FIXED definitely implies something was done
to fix it, which won't be the case here.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l