Bugzilla: Philosophy

Max Kanat-Alexander mkanat at bugzilla.org
Wed Mar 3 02:03:34 UTC 2010

On 03/02/2010 05:42 PM, David Marshall wrote:
> I didn't intend my statement to be parsed so literally that anyone who does
> not actually file bugs, perform searches, or personally fix bugs would feel
> disenfranchised.  I tried to state the generic purpose as concisely and
> briefly as possible.

	Yeah, I know. But the purpose itself has to be complete and fully
understandable by anybody, with no context, or it's just not simple enough.

> "Bugzilla help people and organizations fix bugs effectively by cataloging
> bug reports and coordinating effort."

	Coordinating effort is something that people do.

	"Cataloging" is a pretty good word. My only concern would be that some
people might not understand the full definition of it, but it is very
possibly the best word for the job. :-)

> To what specific end should anyone use Bugzilla?  We need to state that
> clearly enough so that someone who really wants project management or a
> general ticket system doesn't choose Bugzilla instead of a more appropriate
> tool. 

	I agree!

> We should also include something about how Bugzilla implements workflow,
> sends email, etc.  "Collaboratively" is way too hackneyed now,
> unfortunately.

	"Collaboratively" might be the right word, though.

> P.S. I could go on all day about shades of meaning in words, but I have to
> get off that merry-go-round!  I don't feel personally invested in whatever
> the final wording is.

	Hahaha. Well, it's actually, to me, about what the purpose *is*, and
that's why I'm talking about the words--because the words are going to
be the only solid, agreed-upon representation of the purpose that we
have, both for ourselves and for any future developers or users of
Bugzilla. So I want them to be as accurate as possible.

Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.

More information about the developers mailing list