UI module owner

[Gervase Markham]

Benton, Kevin wrote:
> Thinking like a new user for a moment, I may not know enough to use the
> Advanced Search page properly, but I want to know what I need to address
> right now.  Without having to know too much about Bugzilla, what I need
> to address are new and stale bugs.  This page doesn't help me find that
> information.

Let's accept that, for the sake of argument. But that doesn't mean the
solution is a new query page. An alternative example solution would be:
"It looks like there are some queries almost all newbies want to do
which are hard to set up. Let's create some default saved searches with
sensible names that everyone gets - e.g. My Unseen Bugs and My Stale Bugs".

Let's nail down problems rather than argue for particular solutions.

> See my example above - in order to find bugs that are "new to me", the
> user can't get that currently from the "Find a Specific Bug" page.  We
> also don't give the user a way to limit the specific bug searches to
> bugs that the user is assigned to, is the QA contact on, is a CC on, or
> is a commenter on.

But if we added all these features to the simple search page, it would
be half way to being the complicated search page! There's also no way to
limit it to particular components, dates (as Timeless wanted),
priorities or versions - shall we add all those too?

> Not at all, but it seems fair that we should consider what the general
> user needs in order to accomplish day-to-day tasks without needing to go
> through a steep learning curve.

My assertion is that users' needs are sufficiently diverse that there is
no 50% subset of the complicated search page which would meet 95% of
their needs. Of course, we'd need to do some research to determine
whether that was true.

>> We do distribute it, and have for years. It's create-guided.html.tmpl.
> 
> How does a new user get to that page? 

If they don't have canconfirm, they get directed to it by default.

> How does an experienced user get
> to the non-guided page?  

If they have canconfirm, they are directed to it by default.

(At least I think those are the rules. Also, both sorts are linked from
the front page.)

> My company felt that it was worth their while to hire more than one
> person to manage and develop Bugzilla for use within AMD.  Whether or
> not it cost AMD to get Bugzilla initially, it certainly does cost to
> maintain.  Proprietary or not, one clear goal of mine is to contribute
> Bugzilla code where it makes sense to do so.  If I don't do that, I'm
> wasting my time and AMD's money.
> 
> Is Bugzilla proprietary?  IMHO - only slightly.  Is Bugzilla free?  Free
> to download - yes.  Free to get working and use - no, just like all the
> rest of the open source software.  Someone has to have the expertise to
> get it working and keep it working.

Right... what's your point? That it _should_ be free-as-in-maintenance?

Gerv