Duplicates in Tracker

I don't know about anyone else, but the increasing number of duplicates on the tracker is really beginning to bug me, as it takes away attention from important new ones. I know it's probably mainly down to the fact that as there are less and less features that IDEA doesn't have, more people concentrate on these missing features, ergo more people double post. Still, most of the time it's blatantly obvious that an author has not bothered to search for an existing post before posting, leaving it up to other users or JetBrains to weed out dupes. ]]>

Now to be constructive... ;)
I think that probably one of the main reasons people don't search for
existing suggestions before posting duplicates is that, although the
existing tracker searches are powerful, they are also quite complicated. It
can take a little while to construct the query that you want. I think
people can't be bothered (or maybe even don't understand) to use the query
to look for duplicates, especially when there is more than one search term
to AND together.

So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a query
on all open bugs/features with 'Title&Description' CONTAINS all of the
search terms delimited by spaces. That's by far the most common query I run
when I'm checking for duplicates. I have submitted a feature request at
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=487, please vote if you
agree.

Thanks,
N


10 comments
Comment actions Permalink

<rant>
I don't know about anyone else, but the increasing number of duplicates on
the tracker is really beginning to bug me, as it takes away attention from
important new ones. I know it's probably mainly down to the fact that as
there are less and less features that IDEA doesn't have, more people
concentrate on these missing features, ergo more people double post.

Still,

most of the time it's blatantly obvious that an author has not bothered to
search for an existing post before posting, leaving it up to other users

or

JetBrains to weed out dupes.



Yep, agreed. Sometimes it's really obvious that a duplicate could have been
found if it had been searched for.

</rant>


But you must also take into account that different people think differently.
Picking the right words to find a duplicate is not always easy. Especially
if the
words you have in mind produce long lists of (false) results, it can be very
tedious to scan through these lists. As we all have other work to be done,
the
time you can expect one to invest into finding a dupe is limited.

Now to be constructive... ;)
I think that probably one of the main reasons people don't search for
existing suggestions before posting duplicates is that, although the
existing tracker searches are powerful, they are also quite complicated.


I also agree on this one. Searching should be made easier because time is
limited (see above).

So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a query
on all open bugs/features with 'Title&Description' CONTAINS all of the
search terms delimited by spaces. That's by far the most common query I

run

when I'm checking for duplicates. I have submitted a feature request at
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=487, please vote if

you

agree.


Good idea. Gets my vote!
But I think it should not only search on open requests only, because one
might
have a feature in mind that already exists but doesn't know of it. Or, in
case
of a bug, that bug has already been fixed in an upcoming build.

Anyway, an improvement of the search facility should result in a win-win
situation:
Searching is less time consuming for the users and JetBrains has to spend
less time
into dealing with dupes.


Regards,
Sascha


0
Comment actions Permalink

Nathan Brown wrote:

So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a


This has already been suggested as part of
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=246 :)

(But OK, that wasn't the main reason behind that bug, it was only
mentioned in a comment.)

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dang, I should have run a search first ;)

Jonas Kvarnstr?m wrote:

Nathan Brown wrote:

>
>> So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a
>

This has already been suggested as part of
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=246 :)

>

(But OK, that wasn't the main reason behind that bug, it was only
mentioned in a comment.)



0
Comment actions Permalink

Absolutely. It's hard to find existing SCR's for the same problem
sometimes, god knows I've missed them plenty of times, so anything that
makes it easier/quicker to find potential dupes is good with me.

I was just suggesting a quick and simple feature, but of course for
completeness you can attach other controls to the search without making it
overly complicated - e.g. check boxes for 'features' & 'bugs', radio buttons
for 'Only open' & 'All'.

Sascha Weinreuter wrote:
>> >> I don't know about anyone else, but the increasing number of >> duplicates on the tracker is really beginning to bug me, as it takes >> away attention from important new ones. I know it's probably mainly >> down to the fact that as there are less and less features that IDEA >> doesn't have, more people concentrate on these missing features, >> ergo more people double post. Still, most of the time it's blatantly >> obvious that an author has not bothered to search for an existing >> post before posting, leaving it up to other users or JetBrains to >> weed out dupes. > >]]>

Yep, agreed. Sometimes it's really obvious that a duplicate could
have been found if it had been searched for.

>
>> </rant>
>

But you must also take into account that different people think
differently. Picking the right words to find a duplicate is not
always easy. Especially if the
words you have in mind produce long lists of (false) results, it can
be very tedious to scan through these lists. As we all have other
work to be done, the
time you can expect one to invest into finding a dupe is limited.

>
>> Now to be constructive... ;)
>> I think that probably one of the main reasons people don't search for
>> existing suggestions before posting duplicates is that, although the
>> existing tracker searches are powerful, they are also quite
>> complicated.
>

I also agree on this one. Searching should be made easier because
time is limited (see above).

>
>> So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a
>> query on all open bugs/features with 'Title&Description' CONTAINS
>> all of the search terms delimited by spaces. That's by far the most
>> common query I run when I'm checking for duplicates. I have
>> submitted a feature request at
>> http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=487, please
>> vote if you agree.
>

Good idea. Gets my vote!
But I think it should not only search on open requests only, because
one might
have a feature in mind that already exists but doesn't know of it.
Or, in case
of a bug, that bug has already been fixed in an upcoming build.

>

Anyway, an improvement of the search facility should result in a
win-win situation:
Searching is less time consuming for the users and JetBrains has to
spend less time
into dealing with dupes.

>
>

Regards,
Sascha



0
Comment actions Permalink

"Nathan Brown" <nedski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aptknd$47r$1@is.intellij.net...

So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a query
on all open bugs/features with 'Title&Description' CONTAINS all of the
search terms delimited by spaces. That's by far the most common query I

run

when I'm checking for duplicates. I have submitted a feature request at
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=487, please vote if

you

agree.


It should also:

- Search for nearly the same word to account for misspellings (this one has
bitten me).

- Search for words based on the root (e.g., if I search for "visible" it
should find "visibility" which does not contain "visible" but which contains
the same root)

- Search for synonmys.


0
Comment actions Permalink

"Sascha Weinreuter" <sascha.weinreuter@cit.de> wrote in message
news:apu175$lmm$1@is.intellij.net...

But you must also take into account that different people think

differently.

Picking the right words to find a duplicate is not always easy. Especially
if the
words you have in mind produce long lists of (false) results, it can be

very

tedious to scan through these lists. As we all have other work to be done,
the
time you can expect one to invest into finding a dupe is limited.


Perhaps there should also be a "keywords" field when entering or searching
for bugs/features.

Or, and I know this has been suggested before, break the Tracker into
multiple topics. It would be a lot easier to find things that way.


I worked on an application that had a similar problem: users weren't
searching before entering a record and were creating lots of duplicates. So
we let them enter the record, and then searched for duplicates based on
their entry. If duplicates were found, we showed them to the user. Perhaps
something like that can be implemented here.


0
Comment actions Permalink

Erik Hanson wrote:

Perhaps there should also be a "keywords" field when entering or searching
for bugs/features.


no more fields to fill in please!!!!
a title should ceratinly include many keywords - that can be used in
seraching for duplicates


Or, and I know this has been suggested before, break the Tracker into
multiple topics. It would be a lot easier to find things that way.


I'm against this as well. sometimes ther is no single way of
categorizing something, so subjectivity plays a role and what you'd
enter in category XYZ I'd enter in FOOBAR.


I worked on an application that had a similar problem: users weren't
searching before entering a record and were creating lots of duplicates. So
we let them enter the record, and then searched for duplicates based on
their entry. If duplicates were found, we showed them to the user. Perhaps
something like that can be implemented here.


Now, this would be really cool.
Using keywords from the title hopefully.

Edo


--
Edoardo Comar
Cape Clear Software
http://www.capeclear.com

0
Comment actions Permalink

"Edoardo Comar" <ecomar@NOSPAM.capeclear.com> wrote in message
news:apu8vu$1ju$1@is.intellij.net...

Erik Hanson wrote:

Perhaps there should also be a "keywords" field when entering or

searching

for bugs/features.

>

no more fields to fill in please!!!!
a title should ceratinly include many keywords - that can be used in
seraching for duplicates


To clarify: I meant a keywords field where you could only choose from a
preset list of keywords. That way, you wouldn't have the searching problems
of people misspelling words or using synonyms.

But I know what you mean about too many fields to fill in. And making the
user choose from a list would slow the process down even more.


Or, and I know this has been suggested before, break the Tracker into
multiple topics. It would be a lot easier to find things that way.

>

I'm against this as well. sometimes ther is no single way of
categorizing something, so subjectivity plays a role and what you'd
enter in category XYZ I'd enter in FOOBAR.


Things like: editor, configuration, refactoring, installer, OpenAPI. I
wouldn't think there'd be too much problem choosing one category if the
categories are broad enough. Or, allow request to be put into multiple
categories.

Or maybe better searching would be enough.


Erik


0
Comment actions Permalink

Each request has discussion thread that contains root message with its title
and description.
So you should be able use forum search engine to find request.
http://www.intellij.net/forums/search.jsp?forums=13

you can express query like this i.e:
+jsp -compil*

You can also specify scope ( IDEA bugs, features) and date range.

I know this search has no knowledge about request state etc., but for
searching for duplicates it can help till tracker will have better search.

Regards,
--
Tibor Mlynarik
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"





"Nathan Brown" <nedski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aptknd$47r$1@is.intellij.net...

<rant>
I don't know about anyone else, but the increasing number of duplicates on
the tracker is really beginning to bug me, as it takes away attention from
important new ones. I know it's probably mainly down to the fact that as
there are less and less features that IDEA doesn't have, more people
concentrate on these missing features, ergo more people double post.

Still,

most of the time it's blatantly obvious that an author has not bothered to
search for an existing post before posting, leaving it up to other users

or

JetBrains to weed out dupes.
</rant>

>

Now to be constructive... ;)
I think that probably one of the main reasons people don't search for
existing suggestions before posting duplicates is that, although the
existing tracker searches are powerful, they are also quite complicated.

It

can take a little while to construct the query that you want. I think
people can't be bothered (or maybe even don't understand) to use the query
to look for duplicates, especially when there is more than one search term
to AND together.

>

So I propose a 'quick search' box on the main page, which will run a query
on all open bugs/features with 'Title&Description' CONTAINS all of the
search terms delimited by spaces. That's by far the most common query I

run

when I'm checking for duplicates. I have submitted a feature request at
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=487, please vote if

you

agree.

>

Thanks,
N

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Erik Hanson wrote:

To clarify: I meant a keywords field where you could only choose from
a preset list of keywords. That way, you wouldn't have the searching
problems of people misspelling words or using synonyms.


This is something I would like to have too. I don't think one more
field is too much when it could make it so much easier to search for
certain types of bugs or features, as long as the list of categories
isn't too long.

There's already a request for this:
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/itn/viewSCR?publicId=223. Add your
votes there!

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.