Re: Re: UI changes in reporting of exceptions

Jiri Kovalsky wrote:
> I don't think either that registration is necessary. It would be 
> enough to allow people specify their netbeans.org account if they are 
> willing to be CCed or contacted later.
+1

>
>> mounts of stacktraces without any info. It's not valuable for us. The 
>> description is done for the same reason. We are doing some tracking 
>> of IDE, but I believe user can give us some more information, why not 
>> to ask him to give us some help?
>
> Yes, I agree this would be good. Many exceptions are hard to reproduce 
> and this way folks could give us a hint on what they were doing or 
> trying to achieve.
Don't we know that from the gestures collector?

>
>> Component and subcoponents are another quite controversial think. I 
>> understand not everyone understand stacktraces and can fill this 
>> item. We can suggest the component and subcomponent from stacktrace, 
>> but we cannot do it surely now. We can do just some estimation, which 
>> will be filled as default. User doesn't have to change these items, 
>> but he can. I believe there are some users who understand and we want 
>> to give them a chance to change it and help us this way.
>
> This is controversial - you are right. :-) I don't like the idea to 
> ask for a component and subcomponent. This goes against the basic 
> principle to lower barrier and simplify reporting exceptions. This 
> will surely be all greek to majority of potential reporters. Thus I 
> would recommend to offer just one pull down menu offering human 
> readable functionality areas.
Since the 'area of functionality' where the failure occurred can only be 
determined by analyzing the stacktrace there is really no point in 
asking a user for this information. Most users wouldn't have a clue how 
to do this analysis anyway. If you ask them they'll probably just tell 
you what they had done just before the IDE crashed, which is good, but 
not exactly what you were asking for.

I think it would be interesting to run a query on our IssueZilla 
database to see how many defects get reassigned from modules like editor 
or projects to modules where they really belong to.

>
>> What do you think is it better to give users a chance to help us, or 
>> not to bother him with some not compulsory items?
>
> NetCAT simplified bug submission form became so popular because it 
> does many things behind the scenes for example assigning 'component' 
> and 'subcomponent'. Having said that I don't agree we should give 
> users a chance to report bugs directly from IDE via complex dialog 
> full of optional fields.
Yep, another reason for not asking to fill in component/subcomopnent info.

>
> My two cents,
My two kiwis,
-vita