Frontier Issues Tracker

How do I add confirmation to someone's bug report? I don't see a button for that, so is it just that adding a comment and saying "me too" is confirmation?
 
I've had a nose around the issue tracker and while it is great we have one, I would like to offer a couple of suggestions:
  1. Please consider using a smaller font and less spacing.
  2. Would it be possible to add graphs representing %age in each stage (as a pie chart for example), average time to resolve (probably split by area would be useful), created vs resolved chart (as per the JIRA gadget)
  3. Ability to have "issues raised this week" emailed to you
Just a few ideas :)
 
As per CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE's comment:
Paul has said that an issue is confirmed once it has received 10 contributions (not sure if that's contributions from 10 different people or...). The implication being that it's automatic. If so the 'confirmed' status is slightly misleading as it leads people to assume that QA have confirmed the bug which is not the case. But he also said that QA can set the status to confirmed manually.
AFAIK, the confirmation is by Frontier. Once they've confirmed it's an issue, it gets upgraded. At which point, users can now up-vote the issue.
You can add a comment before then in support of the issue; it should help.

How do I add confirmation to someone's bug report? I don't see a button for that, so is it just that adding a comment and saying "me too" is confirmation?
 
Last edited:
AFAIK, the confirmation is by Frontier. Once they've confirmed it's an issue, it gets upgraded. At which point, users can now up-vote the issue.
You can add a comment before then in support of the issue; it should help.
I think that's not right* - once bugs get a certain number of 'me too' additions then they seem to become votable.

*This was happening quite late at night, so not convinced that anyone was watching the site to do that at fdev's end, but they could have been 🤷‍♀️ .

Edit: There are a couple of obvious duplicates that have become votable - surely if fdev were confirming them they would have removed / merged them
 
I think that's not right* - once bugs get a certain number of 'me too' additions then they seem to become votable.
Paul has said that an issue is confirmed once it has received 10 contributions (not sure if that's contributions from 10 different people or...). The implication being that it's automatic. If so the 'confirmed' status is slightly misleading as it leads people to assume that QA have confirmed the bug which is not the case. But he also said that QA can set the status to confirmed manually.
 
I stand corrected, thanks.
Post updated.
Paul has said that an issue is confirmed once it has received 10 contributions (not sure if that's contributions from 10 different people or...). The implication being that it's automatic. If so the 'confirmed' status is slightly misleading as it leads people to assume that QA have confirmed the bug which is not the case. But he also said that QA can set the status to confirmed manually.
 
I think you misunderstood - this thread is not the bug tracking system....
Yep totally misunderstand what this Frontier Issues Tracker systems all about, Normally when you report something it gets looked at by someone from the company supporting the product. Will this happen?
Why do I have to wait for this to be confirmed by other users for this to proceed. I know this thread is not the Bug tracking system it's whats replaced it no?
I just want a bug I have to be looked at by Frontier and fixed and not go through this stupid process!
 
This is a bit worrying. While it's clear you need a way to prevent wild upvoting, this mechanism will soon lead to old issues being starved to death. In the past two years there's been many cases of long-standing bugs, even 1 year long ones. So, we will soon get to a point where we have to remove our votes from old issues to upvote new ones, eventually leading to leaving the old ones without enough votes and potentially meaning they will never get picked up for fixing (i.e., starvation).
Hit the nail on the head .... this is what I see happening, and may explain why many long-term bugs have never been fixed.
 
this is absolutely backwards. most people do not report bugs or engage with the bug fix process - so you engineer a mechanism that deters and blocks the small pool of players willing to spend time helping you out by testing and replicating bugs...

genius.
I am a bit unhappy with the vote system. But there is a simple measure: Just do not vote for anything.
I probably will continue to report bugs or confirm bugs, but why should I vote?
It is Frontiers game, and Frontiers decision, if and which bugs they fix. Voting for a bug will not change that in any way.
So why bother to do it?
 
I can't stand the new system FD has introduced. I've tried using it about half a dozen times & each time I've just come out of it within a couple of minutes.

I used to look at the 1st two or three pages of the old system on a regular basis.

The new system just doesn't do anything for me & quite frankly puts me off using it, even if I have a bug to report.........not one of FD's better ideas I'm afraid!
 
this is absolutely backwards. most people do not report bugs or engage with the bug fix process - so you engineer a mechanism that deters and blocks the small pool of players willing to spend time helping you out by testing and replicating bugs...
Interestingly when I search the old bug forums for posts by you there are ... none. So I guess you're one of the ones that never reports bugs. So - just carry one doing that ;)

Indeed
 
Top Bottom