Minecraft Wiki talk:Issues/notice

Issues/notice creation
I have put down first-pass information on the new bug tracker on what would have been the Issues page for 1.4.2pre. I assume we won't be tracking bugs on the Wiki from now on, and have said so, but I have done this without getting a consensus. So, objections, quibbles, refinements, post them here, or fix the page directly.

You do need to be registered on the tracker site before you can report anything. Haven't mentioned that anywhere yet. Other additions welcome - I was more concerned about getting a usable bare-bones page up quickly than writing a fully comprehensive article. By the way, most of the text content was not written by me, but taken directly from the Mojang blog post announcing the creation of the tracker. --Simons Mith[82.69.54.207] 17:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Cannot use official bug tracker
a! Cannot use official bug tracker, because it doesn't allow accountless reporting. --188.238.164.69 20:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I just won't create account. I haven't done it to this point, and I will not do it later. Sometimes I have been very active reporter, and many times things that I have reported has been corrected. So if it's going to be no non-account users, then I am out. --188.238.164.69 20:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I hope I don't sound rude, but we're sorry to see you go. I honestly do not understand why you don't want to simply make an account. Signing into something takes five seconds. If you're worried about the "full name" thing JIRA uses, don't put your real name down.  20:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's matter of princible. I have gazillion accounts and I am not creating one more password to my password list. Also I am make note that anyone can report. You'd be surprised how much more people report when anonymous reporting is allowed. --188.238.164.69 20:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe the only reason anonymous bug reporting was allowed is solely because this wiki officially held the bug report pages, which fell under the open public contribution that comprises the purpose of a wiki. Bug reporting through accounts is far more organized and alleviates vandalism, which is a constant issue for any wiki. Seeing as this is neither a bug nor annoyance, falling under the "conflict of personal preference" category, I am removing your similar post in the 1.4.1pre page.  21:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a legitimate concern and I sympathise too. There are a few games I enjoy that I'd never create an account over. Ultimately though, this should be a policy decision by Mojang, about whether or not they're willing to allow anonymous bug reports. The price of not is that they will lose a proportion of useful reports they might otherwise have received. They may consider that a price worth paying, as it will filter out a larger number of the 'junk' reports they'd also get.--82.69.54.207 21:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I think at this point, what would be best is either posting this as a suggestion on the forums, or even hope that someone from Mojang reads this and offers their point of view and/or considers it.  21:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey, there is that term again haunting, FORUMS. I don't have account there either. So I cant even complain that I can't have voice of my own because I don't have account. EDIT: They could add public account to current system, that everyone could use. And use built in filtering system filter reports that has been reported by that account, if they wanted to. --188.238.164.69 21:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, me neither! It was 'wiki or nothing' for me, but now I have signed up for the bug tracker as well, because I gather sign-up there is also going to be used for the API, which is something else I'm interested in. --82.69.54.207 21:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * At this point, I would like to bring up how silly it is to reject the commonplace practice of a username/password combo in this day and age, regardless of how many other passwords you use.  21:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There should be universal account with very good security, instead of many accounts and many passwords. But long as things are, as they are on earth, corporates and such, there never will be universal account. --188.238.164.69 22:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Single point failures are a bad idea. If that one access becomes compromised, that's it, it's over.  22:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You didn't read my post completely. I added bolding to my earlier post to point out the thing. --109.240.56.48 11:44, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Features & Bug Updates
Isn't the transfer of all bug tracking to Atlassian without any duplication of bug and/or feature pages here going to break the version lineage we have going? Even if nobody had any qualms about using Atlassian, I wouldn't want the issues pages on the Wiki to end entirely like they apparently have. -- Featherwinglove 00:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There is still going to be version updates and a brief list of bugs in that table like normal, but full-blown bug reporting pages will cease, unless Jeb and/or Dinnerbone wants to continue supporting bug reports here alongside JIRA.  01:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

To the bug reporters
To all of you dedicated bug reporters who came to this page, I salute you. You've helped us squash countless bugs for so long, and for this we are very grateful. You've each helped Minecraft become what it is now, to polish the little things and make sure the big things do what they're supposed to, and this is something you should be proud of. It was a pleasure working with you all, and I hope to see you active on the new tracker :) — Dinnerbone(T) 17:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of the tracker, and am trying to get a hold of Quatroking in IRC, but he is not online/has not been online.
 * Once I do, we're going to discuss what to do. I suspect some wiki-enthusiasts will wish to continue the bug listing for archive purposes, so I'm thinking, a big header to redirect users to the tracker. but I think it best if more than one admin had a say in this. --Kizzycocoa 18:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I wasn't really a bug reporter, but I've become a pretty active contributor. Even though I had little direct contribution to bug reports, I feel I have also helped Minecraft in a sense. I'll make sure to do my part in the new tracker if I find anything that isn't reported already. Thanks for all of your work, Dinnerbone!  19:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Per Kizzycocoa's comment, since the Bug Reporter is the official means to report bugs and there's a very clear notice to that effect at the top of the Issues page, I don't see the harm in continuing "Issues" as an unofficial resource.
 * After looking through the bug reporter, it was easier to check if someone else had the same issue here as you could either skim the page in the appropriate category while scrolling or  to search for keywords. In the bug reporter, though you can skim though the summaries, they are not sorted into categories which will become increasingly difficult to check for specific issues as the list grows (it's already a full page long only one day after the release). When you do a keyword search you are given a list of summaries containing the keyword, but checking each one individually is not efficient as scrolling through a section, and clicking the back button on your browser to return to the search list requires you to approve the search order confirmation each time. -- KADC - &#34;Be unreasonable.&#34; 00:04, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Just thinking out loud, it seems we could produce links that jump direct to particular sets of filtered issues, and which are viewable even if you're not logged in. For example, [https://mojang.atlassian.net/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=labels+%3D+village] will jump to all bugs tags with the 'village' label. If we create a set of these links that roughly correspond to the old tracker categories, we can use the wiki as a sort of 'bug overview' index. Dunno if people think that would be a good idea. Maybe we could also set up bug report templates pre-populated with a reasonable set of standard labels...? You wouldn't have to use them if you didn't want to, but where a standard label fits you could use it without needing to second-guess what phrasing you should use. --Simons Mith[82.69.54.207] 00:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "but checking each one individually is not efficient as scrolling through a section". You can make it show whole reports, like this. --("accountless" one from above discussion "Cannot use official bug tracker") 109.240.56.48 15:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I just tried the expanded view -- is there an option to suppress all but the summary, description, and comments? -- KADC - &#34;Be unreasonable.&#34; 15:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could use some rss feed filtering tools... --109.240.139.233 11:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Why can't we have an unofficial bugs list?
A more-or-less plain list of bugs on a wiki is much easier and faster to read than a whole bunch of reports in a bug tracker. A bug list here might also server as a reference to bug hunters, since they could perhaps use it as a list of stuff to test and potentially confirm. E-102 Gamma 22:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This thought has also crossed other's minds. Kizzycocoa has already set up Issues and Issues/Weekly with the new page format, but removed all the Mojang labels and the Fixed/Skipped sections. The plan for now is reports for archiving purposes, but I see the potential for new bugs to show up from anonymous users that people can then log in the JIRA tracker, since that doesn't allow anonymous reports. Essentially, if JIRA will never allow anonymous reports, the new bug tracker and the old wiki system may end up working in tandem, with the wiki system being more of a slightly useful third leg than a partner.  22:53, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Links to tracker
As an experiment I've tried putting in a 'browse' and a 'report' link that point to the tracker (just for the sounds section at present). On the main Issues page, that is. Good? Bad? --Simons Mith[82.69.54.207] 03:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Maintain Issues as a redirect page
Going by the same procedure as the Development releases issues page, we shouldn't keep have the issues page for the current full version at Issues. Instead, we should create it at Issues/x.x.x for every new update. The issues page should become a redirect like the one for development versions. Everyone agree? --M0rphzone(talk) 22:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It is to my understanding the dev version pages did that to help prevent page corruption and confusion when a new version came out. I have no qualm with the main issue pages doing the same thing.  22:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've moved it. --M0rphzone(talk) 22:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Update tracker link
Is it still possible to edit this page to update the bug tracker link? --KnightMiner (talk 19:44, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Bug Tracker Link Outdated
Just saying, but can a mod/admin edit the Minecraft PC bug tracker from https://mojang.atlassian.net/browse/MC to https://bugs.mojang.com/browse/MC

And the MCPE from https://mojang.atlassian.net/browse/MCPE to https://bugs.mojang.com/browse/MCPE

Mojang migrated from https://mojang.atlassian.net to https://bugs.mojang.com earlier in 2014

--Ethanbmnz (talk) 22:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Not done, as trying to save this page brings down the wiki... –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs ⎜ 03:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry for replying to a month+ old thread, but by this do you mean that it overloads the server? (since that link could be misleading for some; also KnightMiner's topic above is essentially the same as this one)
 * Also MCPE bugs have been suspended on the JIRA and are now being reported at Reddit or the MC Forums -Sonicwave (talk) 08:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks like it's working now. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 06:51, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

The root page of the page is a redirect page to this page.
In fact it can be used to replace the root page which is a redirect page... 114.240.119.20 11:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)