Mailing List Archive

> Please try it out -- submit bugs, search for bugs, etc. The URL is
> http://www.python.org/python-bugs/.

Cool!

About those "Jitterbug bugs" (repeated submissions): those popped up for
me, DA, and MH. The first and the last are almost certainly using IE5 as
their browser, and that DA shows increasing signs of becoming a Windows
Mutant too <wink>.

The first time I submitted a bug, I backed up to the entry page and hit
Refresh to get the category counts updated (never saw Jitterbug before, so
must play!). IE5 whined about something-or-other being out of date, and
would I like to "repost the data"? I said sure.

I did that a few other times after posting other bugs, and-- while I don't
know for sure --it looks likely that you got a number of resubmissions equal
to the number of times I told IE5 "ya, ya, repost whatever you want".

Next time I post a bug I'll just close the browser and come back an hour
later. If "the repeat bug" goes away then, it's half IE5's fault for being
confused about which page it's on, and half mine for assuming IE5 knows what
it's doing.

meta-bugging-ly y'rs - tim

> About those "Jitterbug bugs" (repeated submissions): those popped up for
> me, DA, and MH. The first and the last are almost certainly using IE5 as
> their browser, and that DA shows increasing signs of becoming a Windows
> Mutant too <wink>.
>
> Next time I post a bug I'll just close the browser and come back an hour
> later. If "the repeat bug" goes away then, it's half IE5's fault for being
> confused about which page it's on, and half mine for assuming IE5 knows what
> it's doing.

FYI, I did the same thing but w/ Communicator. (I do use windows, but
refuse to use IE =).

This one's not specifically MS' fault.

>>>>> "TP" == Tim Peters <tim_one@email.msn.com> writes:

TP> The first time I submitted a bug, I backed up to the entry
TP> page and hit Refresh to get the category counts updated (never
TP> saw Jitterbug before, so must play!). IE5 whined about
TP> something-or-other being out of date, and would I like to
TP> "repost the data"? I said sure.

This makes perfect sense, and explains exactly what's going on. Let's
call it "poor design"[1] instead of "user error". A quick scan last
night of the Jitterbug site shows no signs of fixes or workarounds.
What would Jitterbug have to do to avoid these kinds of problems?
Maybe keep a checksum of the current submission and check it against
the next one to make sure it's not a re-submit. Maybe a big warning
sign reading "Do not repost this form!" Hmm. I think I'll complain
on the Jitterbug mailing list.

-Barry

[1] In the midst of re-reading D. Norman's "The Design of Everyday
Things", otherwise I would have said you guys were just incompetent
Webweenies :)

On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
>
> This makes perfect sense, and explains exactly what's going on. Let's
> call it "poor design"[1] instead of "user error". A quick scan last
> night of the Jitterbug site shows no signs of fixes or workarounds.
> What would Jitterbug have to do to avoid these kinds of problems?
> Maybe keep a checksum of the current submission and check it against
> the next one to make sure it's not a re-submit.

That's be good -- alternatively, insert a 'safe' CGI script after the
validation -- "Thanks for submitting the bug. Click here to go back to
the home page".

> That's be good -- alternatively, insert a 'safe' CGI script after the
> validation -- "Thanks for submitting the bug. Click here to go back to
> the home page".

That makes a lot of sense! I'm now quite sure that I had the same
"Repost form data?" experience, and just didn't realized that
mattered, because I was staring at the part of the form that was
showing the various folders.

The Jitterbug software is nice for tracking bugs, but its user
interface *SUCKS*. I wish I had the time to redseign that part --
unfortunately it's probably totally integrated with the rest of the
code...

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

>>>>> "Guido" == Guido van Rossum <guido@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> writes:

Guido> The Jitterbug software is nice for tracking bugs, but its
Guido> user interface *SUCKS*. I wish I had the time to redseign
Guido> that part -- unfortunately it's probably totally integrated
Guido> with the rest of the code...

There is an unsupported fork that some guy did that totally revamped
the interface:

http://lists.samba.org/listproc/jitterbug/0095.html

Still not great tho'.

-Barry

> The Jitterbug software is nice for tracking bugs, but its user
> interface *SUCKS*. I wish I had the time to redseign that part --
> unfortunately it's probably totally integrated with the rest of the
> code...

We looked into bug tracking systems recently, and basically they all suck. We
went with gnats in the end, but it has pretty similar problems on the GUI side.

But maybe we could convince some people with too much time on their hands to
do a Python bug reporting system:-)
--
Jack Jansen | ++++ stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++
Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com | ++++ if you agree copy these lines to your sig ++++
www.oratrix.nl/~jack | see http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm

Jack Jansen writes:
>But maybe we could convince some people with too much time on their hands to
>do a Python bug reporting system:-)

Digicool has a relatively simple bug tracking system for Zope which
you can try out at http://www.zope.org/Collector/ .

--
A.M. Kuchling http://starship.python.net/crew/amk/
I'm going to dance now, I'm afraid.
-- Ishtar ends it all, in SANDMAN #45: "Brief Lives:5"

> Digicool has a relatively simple bug tracking system for Zope which
> you can try out at http://www.zope.org/Collector/ .

I asked, and Collector is dead -- but the new offering (Tracker) isn't
ready for prime time yet. I'll suffer through Jitterbug until Tracker
is out of beta (the first outsider who submitted a bug also did the
Reload thing :-).

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

TP> The first time I submitted a bug, I backed up to the entry page and
TP> hit Refresh to get the category counts updated (never saw Jitterbug
TP> before, so must play!). IE5 whined about something-or-other being
TP> out of date, and would I like to "repost the data"? I said sure.

Barry> This makes perfect sense, and explains exactly what's going on.
Barry> Let's call it "poor design"[1] instead of "user error". A quick
Barry> scan last night of the Jitterbug site shows no signs of fixes or
Barry> workarounds. What would Jitterbug have to do to avoid these
Barry> kinds of problems?

If the submission form uses METHOD=GET instead of METHOD=POST, the backup
problem should go away.

Skip

(finally hobbling through my email after the move to Illinois...)