RT vs Bugzilla

Tue Mar 7 15:26:20 PST 2006

Danny,
Under your assumptions you are right, however you stated in your
original email that most of them already use Bugzilla (the developers)
so I don't see it more cumbersome than it needs to be... :)
Am I missing something??

On 3/7/06, Danny Howard <dannyman at toldme.com> wrote:
> On 3/7/06, cerise at armory.com <cerise at armory.com> wrote:
> > Not knowing anything about RT, I'd think that would prove the superiority
> > of Bugzilla in getting information vital to troubleshooting.
> >
> > One really needs that sort of structure to force users to provide useful
> > feedback.  While that'll put people off at the same time, some pressure
> > from the developers in question might do the trick to keep people in line
> > and filing reports via bugzilla.
>
> Ah, personally, I HATE any system that makes "reporting a bug" any
> more cumbersome than absolutely needed.  You need to make it as easy
> as possible to record that "something is wrong" and then query your
> customer for missing data as needed.  All these "customer service"
> forms that have ever forced me to supply 5, ten, fifty pieces of
> frequently irrelevant data, and then ask me to explain my problem in a
> tiny little window . . .
>
> No.  Tools need to accomodate customer needs, and customer needs low
> barrier to entry.  My cynical take on requiring the user to answer
> twenty questions is that you gain "efficiency" by making it
> sufficiently cumbersome for a user to report trouble such that the
> user will simply tolerate all but the very biggest problems, meanwhile
> cursing the jackasses over in the support organization with their
> "talk to our dumb*ss web interface" mentality.
>
> A good compromise is to capture the user inquiry, and then, if there's
> a standard questionnaire that needs filling out, have them fill it
> out.
>
> Just, ah, my 2c. :)
>
> -danny
>
> --
> http://dannyman.toldme.com
>
>