Bug Filing Recommendations
Writing good bug reports is hard; useful reports are even harder. We should try our best to be thorough, so there's consistency and a fine experience reading bugs. This document concerns itself with outlining some obvious suggestions while reporting/verifying bugs:
- Ensure you can reproduce the bug
- Clear instructions to reproduce the bug. Bonus points for a reproducer script.
- Version details (e.g. Havana ? Grizzly)
- Test environment details
- e.g. some special hardware -- an exotic NAS, etc.)
- Verification procedure
- Include test setup details, configuration details, other relevant context.
- Most of "cloud" testing is dependent on test environment, clearer the details, lesser the round-trips between Development and QE
- If there's a fix available, and someone is verifying it, adding some verification evidence would be useful (instead of just posting a comment saying - "verified". Of course, this can be debated based on the complexity of bugs).
- Relevant log fragment, stdout of a script, or a command being executed.
- Additional info (where appropriate):
- If you've done a lot of investigation into the issue, adding a trace of that would be useful for later archival purposes. Configuration settings, caveats, reproducer scripts, etc.
You get the drift !
- Useful for new test engineers who does not have all the context.
- Useful for docs folks to help them write correct errata text/release notes.
- Useful for non-technical folks reading the bugs/RFEs. Clear information saves a of a lot of time.
- Useful for downstream support organizations.
- If there's a regression years later, having all the info to test/reproduce in the bug, right there makes your day.
- Reduces round-trip of NEEDINFO between Development and QE.
- Useful for new users referring to these.
- Overall, a very fine bug reading experience.
Resources from other communities
- Bug writing guidelines -- https://landfill.bugzilla.org/bugzilla-4.2-branch/page.cgi?id=bug-writing.html