Lightboxing spoils spoilering



  • All of these are spoilered images, and appeared spoilered in preview. The px number is the width of the image.

    Current site settings:

    1600px:
    [spoiler][/spoiler]

    800px:
    [spoiler][/spoiler]

    400px:
    [spoiler][/spoiler]

    200px:
    [spoiler][/spoiler]



  • That's a regression isn't it? They had that working at some point. 🚮



  • I think it was an attempt to fix the 'spoilering spoils lightboxes' in that a spoilered thumbnail didn't produce a lightbox when clicked when it should have. A bug I'm sure I raised this recently but cannot find. This is the closest I can find from back in '13:



  • @PJH said:

    A bug I'm sure I raised this recently but cannot find.

    I wonder why :rolleyes:



  • @Gaska said:

    @PJH said:
    A bug I'm sure I raised this recently but cannot find.

    I wonder why :rolleyes:

    I think that particular one's more of a case of "this bug doesn't exist any more - lets delete it so we have less clutter."



  • Isn't that what closing is for?



  • Sure, but then there's evidence it existed.


  • SockDev

    @PJH said:

    I think that particular one's more of a case of "this bug doesn't exist any more - lets delete it so we have less clutter."

    and that, ladies and gentlepersons, is why DISCOURSE IS NOT A BUG TRACKER

    you should NEVER be able to delete a bug report from your bug tracker.

    close WONTFIX, yes

    close ASDESIGNED, yes.

    assign it to the backlog of death where all bugs go to wait in eternal limbo, yes.

    Delete a bug from public visibility? NO

    </rant>



  • @accalia said:

    Delete a bug from public visibility? NO

    You can hide it from public eyes but if you hide it for your dev's you are collectively lying to yourself


  • SockDev

    If your bug tracker is public then your bug reports must be public.

    you can have an internal team tracker that is not public in addition to the public tracker, and you can have a method for responsibly disclosing security issues, but once the bug is public it MUST remain so, otherwise your bug tracker cannot be trusted.



  • @accalia said:

    Delete a bug from public visibility? NO

    I'd imagine there's not a bug tracker in existence where someone with high enough access can't delete bugs.



  • @accalia said:

    If your bug tracker is public then your bug reports must be public.

    Security related issues?


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    @accalia said:
    Delete a bug from public visibility? NO

    I'd imagine there's not a bug tracker in existence where someone with high enough access can't delete bugs.

    within the bug tracker software? there had better not.

    i'll give you it's always possible from the database level, but as a user of the bug tracker software of any permission level.... no, that should not be an option.


  • SockDev

    @PJH said:

    Security related issues?

    see alternate channels for responsibly disclosing the issue.

    once the security issue is resolved and released then you enter it into the public bug tracker (redacted to flavour)



  • @accalia said:

    within the bug tracker software? there had better not.

    oh great so bug #1 will always be 'Test Bug' ?


  • SockDev

    @Luhmann said:

    oh great so bug #1 will always be 'Test Bug' ?

    Is that a bad thing?

    if you dislike that, then have a different numbering scheme. maybe something like GIT's SHA hashes for commits. you could use that for bugs.



  • @accalia said:

    within the bug tracker software? there had better not.

    Quality Center, for example, allows it. Access is controlled by permissions.


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    Quality Center, for example, allows it.

    /me makes a note to strike that off her list of "approved" bug trackers.



  • @accalia said:

    SHA hashes

    But how are we going to hold a party when bug 666 gets squashed?


  • SockDev

    @Luhmann said:

    @accalia said:
    SHA hashes

    But how are we going to hold a party when bug 666 gets squashed?

    that's a deal breaking concern for you when choosing a bug tracker?!

    :wtf:



  • @accalia said:

    that's a deal breaking concern for you when choosing a bug tracker?!

    Yes!

    But it might explain why I'm no longer consulted on such decisions.


  • SockDev

    @Luhmann said:

    Yes!

    :wtf: :interrobang:

    @Luhmann said:

    But it might explain why I'm no longer consulted on such decisions.
    That.... seems likely



  • @accalia said:

    @Luhmann said:
    Yes!

    :wtf: :interrobang:

    I see your :wtf: and raise it with a :trollface:



  • @loopback0 said:

    I'd imagine there's not a bug tracker in existence where someone with high enough access can't delete bugs.

    GitHub Issues - not even the owner of the repository can delete issues or pull requests once they are created, even though they can edit the content of all comments. GitHub probably can only remove issues that violate the law. (Although you can just edit comments to remove stuff, changes in the issue/PR title are tracked and publicly visible and thus would have to be removed by GitHub).



  • @accalia said:

    @loopback0 said:
    Quality Center, for example, allows it.

    /me makes a note to strike that off her list of "approved" bug trackers.

    I'm sure HP will be gutted.

    It's trivially switched off.
    I don't see the issue with it - do people generally not trust their own developers?
    If you don't trust your developers to fix bugs rather than delete them, you have other issues.



  • Previously reported? Can't tell if it's the same bug, because spoilering and images and Firefox don't always get along even on good days...

    https://what.thedailywtf.com/t/cant-spoiler-lightboxed-images/51290/1


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    I don't see the issue with it - do people generally not trust their own developers?If you don't trust your developers to fix bugs rather than delete them, you have other issues.

    My team? hells yes i trust them.

    it's other teams that i have less trust on.

    We've seen with Discourse that the power to delete bugs can be abused, and what can be abused will eventually be abused.

    I trust my team, but i also have to trust the teams of every project my project relies on. and when they use a forum as a bug tracker, or don't even have a bug tracker at all.... well it becomes really hard to trust them.



  • @accalia said:

    it's other teams that i have less trust on.

    @accalia said:

    the power to delete bugs can be abused,

    So you don't give those teams access to delete bugs. Problem solved.

    Just in case it seems like I'm sticking up for Quality Center (the cost of which is enough to strike it off most people's list of options) - I'm not, I just think being able to delete bugs is a silly reason to discount bug tracking software.


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    So you don't give those teams access to delete bugs. Problem solved.

    OI! JEFF! YOU CAN'T DELETE BUGS! IT'S WRONG!

    .... oh. he banned me.....


  • I survived the hour long Uno hand

    @loopback0 said:

    Quality Center, for example, allows it. Access is controlled by permissions.

    JIRA is the same way. Global admins can delete anything, and they can revoke or grant the ability to delete tickets to anyone in the permissions system. It does give a warning saying "Are you sure? If the bug is fixed, close it instead!"



  • The problem is, many programmers don't give a shit about warnings.



  • Yes, make the bug tracker a blockchain, like in bitcoin, where every bug has the hash of the previous one so there is no possibility of deleting one.



  • Why lecture us? We all know that already.



  • Oh noes a bug in Discourse.

    Better report it so it gets fixed quickly!

    No, wait, we can't do that. And it wouldn't get fixed either way.

    Better fork Discourse I guess?


  • SockDev

    @blakeyrat said:

    Why lecture us? We all know that already.

    If we were all of one mind not only would the world be a very boring place but there would be no discussion on the topic.

    also, do you* need a reason to rant about things? I think not.

    * For the record, that's the inclusive not imperitive form of 'you'. That is i am referring to a group of people that includes every member of this forum with that use of the word you.



  • @accalia said:

    also, do you* need a reason to rant about things? I think not.

    I do.



  • @loopback0 said:

    @accalia said:
    within the bug tracker software? there had better not.

    Quality Center, for example, allows it. Access is controlled by permissions.

    Unless you're going through the rest or com interface but that might be just how shoddily they set it up. On another note I found the com interface more pleasing to use than that awful fucking gui.

    @Gaska said:

    also, do you* need a reason to rant about things? I think not.

    I do.

    Call the doctor!



  • @DogsB said:

    but that might be just how shoddily they set it up

    I suspect so.


  • SockDev

    @DogsB said:

    On another note I found the com interface more pleasing to use than that awful fucking gui.

    ..... wow..... that takes some impressively bad UX to do that....



  • Meh. The QC user interface isn't particularly offensive.

    I'm more offended by the fact we're stuck on the previous version which loves ActiveX and only runs on Windows.



  • @Luhmann said:

    your dev's you

    My dev is me?


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    FWIW, a godadmin more often than not has db access, because that kind of stuff is accessible in the admin panel. So the point is somewhat :moo: once you get to a certain level of admin



  • I'd say security bugs reported the wrong way should still be hidden until they're fixed.

    Edit: Also, what do you do if a spambot gets access to your public bug tracker?


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @ben_lubar said:

    I'd say security bugs reported the wrong way should still be hidden until they're fixed.

    Edit: Also, what do you do if a spambot gets access to your public bug tracker?

    This too

    It makes sense to allow a certain level of admin the ability to delete bug reports.

    If that ability gets abused, however.......... :doing_it_wrong:



  • I like the idea of GitHub/Bitbucket/[insert hosted VCS+issue tracker site name here] because it means the people who are in charge of the site and getting rid of abusive stuff are not the same people who are in charge of individual repositories.

    You can report abuse on something, but that's not going to get legitimate reports deleted, and you'll probably end up banned for abusing the abuse system.


  • mod

    @NedFodder said:

    Previously reported? Can't tell if it's the same bug, because spoilering and images and Firefox don't always get along even on good days...

    You are correct, that is the same bug.



  • @accalia said:

    OI! JEFF! YOU CAN'T DELETE BUGS! IT'S WRONG!

    .... oh. he banned me.....

    Yeah, his craziness about getting rid of stale content totally falls down when it comes to keeping track of bugs. Dog food sounds good but you have to remember that dogs also eat their own vomit.



  • Dogfooding the world's most popular administrative trolling platform as an issue tracker.


  • area_deu

    @accalia said:

    We've seen with Discourse that the power to delete bugs can be abused, and what can be abused will eventually be abused.

    That's not a Discourse issue, that's a project management issue.



  • Why not both?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.