Number: 43
Date: 17-Mar-84 0':01':13
Submitter: Sannella.pa
Source: ROACH.PA
Subject: Redesign LispAR Adobe Fields
Assigned To:
Attn: Sannella.pa
Status: Open
In/By:
Problem Type: Documentation
Impact: Moderate
Difficulty: Hard
Frequency: Everytime
Priority: Hopefully
System: Text
Subsystem: Other
Machine:
Disk:
Lisp Version:
Source Files:
Microcode Version:
Memory Size:
File Server:
Server Software Version:
Disposition:
Description: '
Date': 12 MAR 84 21':31 PST'
From': ROACH.PA'
Subject': Adobe fields'
To': lispsupport'
cc': roach'
'
I think "Subject':" belongs at the top of the AR. It would probably'
also make sense to keep all the short items in one place by moving'
"Assigned To':", "Priority':", "Edit-By':", & "Edit-Date':" above the'
lengthier "Disposition':", "Description':", "Workaround':", and "Test Case':".'
I would arrange the top half of an AR as':'
number, date'
subject'
assigned to, priority'
problem type, impact, status'
system, machine'
subsystem, disk'
source files'
lisp version, microcode version'
file server, server software version'
submitter, attn'
edit-by, edit-date'
I.e., keep the interesting stuff at the top, names of people farther'
down. (If "In/By':" is supposed to be when the problem gets solved, you'
can stick it up near "Priority':").'
The bottom half of an AR I would organize as':'
description'
test case'
disposition'
work around'
or as':'
disposition'
work around'
description'
test case'
Question. Am I allowed to check out ARs, or should I work completely'
through LISPSUPPORT mail? Am I allowed to use AR submit?'
Kelly'
-----'
Date': 12 MAR 84 22':27 PST'
From': ROACH.PA'
Subject': Proposed ADOBE "Difficulty':" field'
To': lispsupport'
cc': roach'
'
The "Impact':" field measures how difficult it is for the customer'
to live with a problem, but there seems to be no field indicating'
how difficult it will be for the Assignee to fix the problem. "Priority':"'
only estimates the chances that the problem will ever be solved and'
"In/By':" deadlines are bound to slip with little correlation between'
nearness of the deadline and complexity of the problem. How about adding'
a "Difficulty':" field. Difficulty could range over values Impossible,'
Dream, Hard, Moderate, & Trivial.'
Kelly'
-----'
Subject': Re': Proposed ADOBE "Difficulty':" field'
In-reply-to': ROACH.PA''s message of 12 MAR 84 22':27 PST'
To': ROACH.PA'
'
Actually, there IS a difficulty field. However, it doesn''t show up when you initially submit the AR with Adobe Submit --- only when you edit it with Adobe Edit. The rational for this seems to be that you don''t want the submitter assigning difficulty, priority, "assigned to':" fields, because only the AR "screener" (i.e. me) should do that. This is something that I am thinking about.'
-----'
Date': 13 MAR 84 23':01 PST'
From': MASINTER.PA'
Subject': AR field list, etc.'
To': roach, lispsupport'
'
Kelly, I like most of your suggestions.'
'
I think you can personalize how YOU see the AR''s by editing the file LispAR.User, deactivating and reactivating Adobe. (If not, you might have to re-load Adobe. I don''t quite understand how it works, but rebooting usually does it.)'
'
Edit-by and Edit-date are filled in automatically, so they could stay at the bottom.'
'
Also, Michael, I see no reason why Kelly shouldn''t enter AR''s directly ... why not lets try it and see how it works? That is part of what we want to learn -- does it work to have a lot of people working on the AR system?'
'
The only rule that I think applies is':'
'
NEVER DELETE ANY TEXT'
'
ALWAYS MARK, IN DISPOSITION, WHAT EDITS YOU MADE.'
'
(you can see in SDD people leave notations, e.g. 8Mar84 Pam, Status←Closed'
).'
'
How ''bout it Michael?'
-----'
Date': 15 Mar 84 11':36':40 PST (Thursday)'
From': JFung.pasa'
Subject': Adobe Usage'
To': MASINTER.PA'
cc': LE, Sannella.PA, Raim, 1100Support, LispSupport.pa, JFung'
'
Larry,'
'
I have some suggestions toward using Adobes.'
'
I made up the following persons and their roles on playing Adobe and their responsible fields.'
'
1. Submitter/Source'
2. Screener'
3. Desinger/Implementator ("Assigned to")'
4. Test Acceptance person'
'
First, I think we have "submitters" who submit AR, and we aslo need to have "screeners" who SCREEN these AR and assign them to the responsible person and adjust any improper assignments made by "submitters". '
'
The submitters and source (people forward AR to submitters) should try to fill out as many fileds as possilbe in Adobe-Submit window.'
'
We then have "screeners" who assign this AR to assigned person. (I think when submitters gain experience, then we dont need screeners, and Assigned To person can change improper assignments when they see fit.)'
'
'
I. SUBMITTERS': (Le.pasa, Sannella.pa)'
'
Responsbible for following fileds': (Suggest mandatory, all fields should be filled)'
Source':'
System{}/Subsystem{}'
Machine{}/Disk{}'
Status{New, Wish, Incomplete}. (These are the only values they should use as submitters.)'
Subject':'
Lisp Version':'
Problem Type{}'
Frequency{}'
Impact{} (please dont get upset by this selection, it is a judgement call from user and may very well differ from designer/implementator''s view)'
Description':'
'
I would say if any filed from above are missing, the submitter should turn it away. Else the screeners should say Status{Incomplete}'
'
The folowing fields should be supplied if info is available':'
uCode Verison':'
Memory Size':'
File Server{}'
Server Software Version':'
Test Case': '
'
'
II. SCREENERS': (Masinter.pa)'
'
The screeners should VERIFY all fileds entered are proper and assign AR to designers/implementators. (The Adobe.fields file have this information) '
'
Responsible for following fields':'
'
Assigned To':'
and above fields supplied by Submitters.'
'
'
III. DESIGNERS/IMPLEMENTATORS ("Assigned To")':'
Responsible for following fields':'
'
Difficulty{}'
Priority{}'
Workaround':'
Attn':'
Status{Open, Declined, Obsolete, Superseded, Wish, Fixed} *(restricted selection)'
'
'
'
IV. TEST ACCEPTANCE PERSON': (1100Support in most cases, or source person if orignated from internal)'
'
Whose responsibility is to verify "Fixed" ARs are indeed "Fixed" and change it to Status{Closed}. It he/she disagrees that it is fixed, then he/she changes it back to "Open" '
'
Responsible for following fields':'
Status':{Closed, Open}'
In/By': '
'
'
'
/Jerry'
'
P.S. I have also suggested that we create the LispAR-Submit.Form for people to use(fill out) so they can just mail to Submitters. I think we might even give these forms to customers as guidelines for them to fill out bug-reports and ensure that WE have all the necessary information regaring a bug-report. '
'
-----'
From': masinter.pa'
Date': 16-Mar-84 1':32':33 PST'
Subject': Re': Adobe Usage'
In-reply-to': JFung.pasa''s message of 15 Mar 84 11':36':40 PST (Thursday)'
To': JFung.pasa'
cc': MASINTER, LE.pasa, Sannella, Raim.pasa, 1100Support.pasa, LispSupport'
'
one thing in your message went by':'
'
Impact': Fatal/Serious/Moderate/... is not entirely subjective; it is not how you feel about it. An AR can be Annoying or have Moderate impact, and yet be VERY IMPORTANT. Fatal means just that': you are going along and when this strikes, you lose work. Serious means that it slows you down, you hve to take some extra steps, etc. but it doesn''t crash your system etc.'
'
So there are objective criteria. '
'
You left out the "Priority" field. Its setting, if we are going to take it seriously, is a subject of some negotiation. '
'
-----'
'
Date': 28 Apr 84 17':40 PST'
From': vanMelle.pa'
Subject': AR categories'
To': LispSupport'
cc': vanMelle.pa'
'
I don''t know where you''re gathering this info (Ar''s on the Lisp Ar system, I guess), but here are some category confusions I''ve noticed':'
'
Under Communications': want subsystem "Low-level ether" to cover basic ethernet transport problems. Files in this category are LLETHER and 10MBDRIVER.'
'
Under Language Support': Lisp BCPL is clearly not "Microcode", but it''s not clear where it does belong. Bootstrapping is closer.'
'
The difference between "Open" and "Wish" is pretty fuzzy.'
Workaround:
Test Case:
Edit-By: Sannella
Edit-Date: 12-May-84 18':26':38