Those are actually two ideas, but they are quite intertwined, so I just posting this as an idea.
It's an unstructured idea dump, but maybe one or two things in here are interesting:
In the bug reporting flow could be like
select component
enter title (-> sees related bugs)
needs to click on "My issue is not listed" to continue
enter source code + optional flag with CLI args (-> sees output from run.dlang.io)
needs to click on "My output is different" if automatic verification doesn't work
Ideally the source code would be stored as a separate field, s.t. e.g.
it's easy to check which issues have been accidentally fixed.
people looking at the bug can press on "Open in IDE" and directly play with it (yeah I know you could copy/paste to your vim/emacs, but people seem to like zero-conf web stuff these days)
we can automatically run your dreg via run.dlang.io to detect whether it was a regression (or at least allow reviewers to do so via the IDE button)
With one file it's often meh, I just copy/paste it, but with multiple files standardizing to sth. like har would be another nice to have (or at least recommending it to the user).
Those are actually two ideas, but they are quite intertwined, so I just posting this as an idea. It's an unstructured idea dump, but maybe one or two things in here are interesting:
In the bug reporting flow could be like
Ideally the source code would be stored as a separate field, s.t. e.g.
dregvia run.dlang.io to detect whether it was a regression (or at least allow reviewers to do so via the IDE button)So essentially instead of manually curating https://github.com/CyberShadow/DBugTests, the idea would be to have it directly stored in Bugzilla.
With one file it's often meh, I just copy/paste it, but with multiple files standardizing to sth. like har would be another nice to have (or at least recommending it to the user).
Related to: https://github.com/CyberShadow/bugzilla-meta/issues/2