19 Sep
2009
19 Sep
'09
11:40 p.m.
On Sep 19, 2009, at 11:25 PM, Ecaterina Valica wrote:
The "original" Ubuntu paper cut definition
But we also need to know usability issues so we need that usability
tag + we already have the notion of difficulty. It's all about the
amount of work to do. Proposing ideas is easy but following them up is
hard to the less new concepts introduced the easiest it is.
Anyway provided you tag with usability and the difficult level you can
also tag with whatever else you want but you should tag at least with
difficulty and usability, that's my point since otherwise we'd be
dropping what we've already started which is bad and not consistent
and then it'll all be a mess.
Thanks
-Vincent
Put briefly, *a paper cut is* *a trivially
fixable usability bug
that the
average user would encounter on his/her first day of using a brand
new
installation of Ubuntu Desktop Edition*
so the papercut is so much trivial than it is an usability bug.
How can he tag with papercut if he doesn't know if it's a trivial
issue (since the definition of a paper cut is
that it's a trivial
issue)! :)
IMO if we want to make this initiative an user reporting process, it's
easier and more intuitive to mark the reported issues with a tag
that states
the paperCut concept, than to mark it with a difficulty level. If the
developer comes and marks it difficult, we still know that the user
though
that the issue needed attention and raises an usability problem.
I don't think papercut == usability issue. For usability issues we
should tag them with "usability" IMO since the need is more general
than just for papercuts.
Thanks
-Vincent