So, how does IPS deal with the tracker?

[chilihead]

What is wrong with the current tracker specifically?

There used to be a My Issues button right in the Tracker as well as Issues I started, Issues I Replied To, etc., in the sort at the bottom. Also it used to list the last replier in the the grid. Now that only shows on the Tracker home.

The IP.Content search looks clunky, and with body text instead of just the titles it is hard to find issues.

Also why not add the App name to the version numbers? It's just a list of numbers for all the apps. If you see the app name, then you are reminded of what version you have when you see it.

Really, we need to sort by our own issues quickly. Right from the Tracker page.

[Andy Millne]

Also why not add the App name to the version numbers? It's just a list of numbers for all the apps. If you see the app name, then you are reminded of what version you have when you see it.

This is a temporary issue which has been mentioned as something that will be looked at in a future version of IP.Content

Really, we need to sort by our own issues quickly. Right from the Tracker page.

http://community.invisionpower.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=user_activity&search_app=ccs&mid=159598&userMode=all

[chilihead]

That's hard to read with all the body text. Why not just titles? And it lists the starter, not the last replier. And I don't see that available from the Tracker page.

I would like to see a list of titles and a last reply column with bold titles for replies so we can check for updates, directly from the Tracker page, as in a My Issues button.

[chilihead]

This is a temporary issue which has been mentioned as something that will be looked at in a future version of IP.Content

All you have to do is add the app name next to the numbers for now. Of course if the app numbers were related to the app category even better, but this could be a temp fix.

[MisterPhilip]

I've had a suggestion thread of it as well, but I think it is finally clear to me. I think a lot of the issues for me with the tracker are based around consistency. Perhaps a majority of it is IP.C's way of going about that.

IMO a bug entry should have the same feel as a forum entry on VNC / view content in general. Look at the following screenshot, look at all of the information missing from the bug tracker reports. IPS might not use the extra information, but I sure do. I like to know who / when the last reply was, when it was started, or the status. Shouldn't I be able to see out of all of my bug reports which are closed / NAB / etc?


BTW - I hate the reason (excuse really) "it works for us" because in this case, you're not the only ones using it.

Or NAB them and then we go "..uh, wait. What?"

I can't be the only one that feels this way. >_>;

You're not, trust me. ;) This is one of the main reasons I don't really like posting bug reports.

Also why not add the App name to the version numbers? It's just a list of numbers for all the apps. If you see the app name, then you are reminded of what version you have when you see it.

+1 for that. If it is a temporary problem, then add a better temporary fix.

[chilihead]

I like to know who / when the last reply was, when it was started, or the status. Shouldn't I be able to see out of all of my bug reports which are closed / NAB / etc?

Yes, I forgot to mention, the status needs to be in the grid view.

[Alfa1]

It seems there is no way to petition a fixed/ closed bug to be reopened?

[Charles]

It seems there is no way to petition a fixed/ closed bug to be reopened?

Make a comment. We read all comments.

[Alfa1]

Have done so. :)

Wouldn't it be useful if the tracker would have functionality to petition to reopen?

[Charles]

Have done so. :smile:

Wouldn't it be useful if the tracker would have functionality to petition to reopen?

No :) That would be abused in about 3.765 seconds.

[Alfa1]

That doesnt happen much on the vbulletin tracker, as only licensed customers can petition.

[Rimi]

That's... So... Dumb...

[chilihead]

Wouldn't it be useful if the tracker would have functionality to petition to reopen?

A petition to open only makes sense if it is closed for comments, which it is not. To petition the status, leave a comment on how you were able to reproduce the bug. I can't see how a petition of status change button is needed, if it is marked fixed. A comment is better.

[bfarber]

Yes, simply comment on the report. If you believe your comment is being ignored, you can even report it using the "Report" link on either your comment or the bug report itself, or PM me and I'll take a look myself.

[Alfa1]

OK. I will report it then as it seems that comments are being missed and bugs left unfixed.

It seems to me that its useful for developers to easily see a list of open issues. With 'open' I mean issues that need to be addressed. A fixed issue may be open for comments, but the issue is resolved. If semantics are important, then a petition to 'mark as unfixed' suits well. At least that flags the item as in need of attention.

Alex just asked me what issues I am stuck on with my conversion while I have been waiting on response for a over a week. This is very customer unfriendly as there is no indication that the issue is even looked at and it does not seem that there is any way that developers get notified about the issue.

The 'fixed in' function seems pretty useless at it is ATM, as bugs get marked fixed, but not in what version and build. So if the bug is marked fixed and the latest version does not fix it, the customer can only keep downloading the files daily, to check if the bug is still there.

It would really be beneficial if its possible to see on the overview who the reporter is and who has made the last comment. Then it would not be needed to keep opening the same bug reports to check for responses and it would be easy to see which reports are mine. (Many bug reports are very similar)

[Aiwa]

Just because a bug is 'fixed' doesn't mean it's in the client area download... It's fixed and put in the next build that will go through product release testing.

In my experience, IPS only updates the download in the client area with a new version, 3.4.1 for example, or with patches for show stopping issues or security issues... Like the recent patch for 3.4.0 that tweaked the backup task (at least that's what i think it was about)...

So when a bug is marked 'fixed in 3.4.1', you won't get your hands on it in an 'official client area release' until 3.4.1 is officially released...

If IPS is confident in the solution and don't need it alpha / beta tested, they sometimes release a manual fix for it...

The above is my experience... Not any official IPS practice... Just saying how I've observed things to work...

Hopefully with a better understanding of previous history your feedback can be targeted to what you think could be improved upon.

[Alfa1]

This concerned the converter which was frequently updated. None of the bugs are marked with a version. Probably is because no suitable version is in the tracker drop down.

[sychn]

oops, what happened to this topic...

maybe I should ask for the IP.Content tutorial directly at the beginning.

btw, special thanks to Rimi for the tutorial link, hope IPS can write a little bit more.

[bfarber]

The converters category is managed a bit special - sorry for any confusion regarding the version numbers. We'll see if we can improve the versioning in the tracker for the converters package.