What are the most effective ways to report software bugs in software design?

Design bugs are not easy to catch, as there is no specific test cases to evaluate them. Usually, these issues pops ups after some sort of time, after apply new changes, modify existing functions or increase the system throughput. Following techniques can be used to find design bugs at earlier stages: 1. Design review by expert 2. Load test 3. Code scanners 4. Forecast the upcoming features from the roadmap and assess the changes cost based on the current design. From reporting perspective, the most effective way is to report the bug against the work item that is connected with the code commit. There, the devs would easily conclude the impacted area from a specific code commit. Surely, the bug need to follow standards and level of details

IMO the main purpose of bug reporting is fixing those bugs. So, I think it all starts with documenting the exact sequence of inputs, system state, configuration, and conditions that led to the bug manifestation, release version, console/log dump, screen capture, and everything else that might be relevant. The reason for this is that to fix a bug one needs to re-create it, which might be hard without having the information above. A brief description of the expected behavior might be relevant. On occasion, something that is expected might be characterized as a bug by mistake.

One thing I tell folks to do is to provide these three things: 1. This is what I did. 2. This is what I expected to happen. 3. This is what actually happened. The "what I did" part should include not only the steps, but any environment that needs to be present for the un-desired behavior to happen. That includes the operating system, the application version, etc. "This is what I expected to happen" is super important - bugs lie in the gap between expected and actual behavior. Finally, saying what actually happened is crucial - again to help see where the gap is, but also to help the developer to understand where in the code the behavior is happening. This might include things like log files and database dumps as part of 'what happened.'

It is important to first document the exact system/software conditions under which the bug is identified so it becomes easy to repeatedly reproduce the bug, which in turn makes it easier to locate the source of the bug and apply a fix.

I think while reporting a bug one should check if it is consistently reproducible or happens inconsistently and in special cases. If there are special cases, document them in detail in a bug-tracking system used by your team. It also helps to categorize the bugs (as per different modules or functionalities in software) to save time for the development team. As far as possible, avoid reporting bugs in email or chat, rather enter them in the bug tracking system and assign it to the development team. I also find it useful to attach email communication (if any) or any document while filing a bug. Add also, in which release or particular version of the software, the bug was found. Add snapshots/videos for reporting UI bugs.

Bug tracking systems help to report and keep a close track of issues reported over the years. It is really helpful to even go back and check some old issues that were addressed in the system and could be a reference for some new occurrences. Also, tracking the bug to closure and ensuring that no client is impacted is always good. I use JIRA for tracking issues and it has some amazing features that help us to identify quality risks related to any new features going to production, tracking individual's quality metrics, etc.

I've found bug tracking systems like Jira indispensable. They prevent duplicates and lost reports, ensuring efficient bug management. For instance, when a critical bug emerged in our fintech software, Jira's categorization and assignment tools quickly directed it to the right team. Its communication features enabled fast, effective problem-solving among developers and testers. The system’s reporting capabilities also provide valuable insights into bug patterns and resolution efficiency. This is essential for maintaining software quality in a dynamic tech environment.

While reporting bugs, we need to be very precise with the following: (1) Specific conditions and scenarios under which the bug is seen. (2) Reproducibility of the bug - does it recur every time or random and ratio? (3) Environment and Setup under which the bug is seen. (4) Versions of the software/hardware that exhibit the bug. (5) Test Case with exact test steps. (6) Issue logs and traces for debugging process. Images/videos and of issue (7) Test automation scripts if applicable.

JIRA is slow but it works. First make sure the categories make sense, and that the team are onboard with the system. Trello is much better when the bugs are similar or related as you can easily see the cards in a column. Trello is also less formal so can be poisoned more easily

In my perspective, bugs are instances where developers have overlooked certain scenarios and sequences. I feel that nowadays this occurs more frequently because developers tend to prioritize completing the requested use case sequences, often giving less attention to exception scenarios. When it comes to effective bug reporting, I would recommend that a QA person includes the scenarios which is root cause of the bug, within the bug report and specifies the logical sequence to address them. This approach would be beneficial.

A clear and concise title is helpful and should contain a short pregnant description of the bug, additional information e.g. about the impact and the related software module should be added to the title from my experience.

Title of the bug should be concise, pricise and self explanatory that anyone can get a high level idea about it. Better to include some specific keywords that gives an idea of the component that is failing or having an issue and helps developer to understand where to look for to solve it.

A Jira ticket with * A detailed description of issue. * Reproduction steps. * Error logs. * Screenshots. * Environment details. * Identifying Components involved.

The most effective way to deal with a bug in the design of the software is to discuss it face-to-face (with whiteboard nearby ;) with the software designer (architect, coder, etc). Reality often prevents it from being done - for that we have multitude of progressively inferior tools and techniques (from e-mail to confluence in no particular order)

In my perspective, Reproducing step is the most important thing should always be there in the bug reports for understanding the actual reason while debugging.

While reporting bugs, we need to be very precise with the following: (1) Specific conditions / scenarios under which the bug is seen. (2) Reproducibility of the bug - does it recur every time or is it sporadic? (3) Environment and Setup under which the bug is seen. (4) Software versions of the microservices in question, that exhibit the bug. (5) Test Case details and test steps. (6) Execution logs and traces for aiding the debugging process. (7) Test automation scripts as applicable. (8) Test setup diagram.

To Report bugs in Software design following points are important 1. Details of bug : It includes pre-, requisite, steps to reproduce, frequency of that bug , Environment, device or browser details, duration 2. Impact of bug : Severity and Priority of that bug 3. Use case details : this is required to understand while performing which use case we encountered the bug 4. Evidence: it could be in the form of network logs, screenshots, videos

The bug-free SW is a dream of perfection. Without bugs, many SW engineers would not have jobs. The reality is there are always more bugs in SW than available resources to fix them. For this reason, bugs that affect usability, functionality, and customer satisfaction need to be fixed first. So, the priority needs to be assigned accordingly. It is a little bit more complicated, since QA resources availability, release and shipment dates, and promises to “important” customers mess things up. But that is what managers are for – adjusting priorities based on business needs.

It's alright to ask for help when trying to identify impact and priority. If everything is high priority, that's just noise, and it makes triaging way too difficult.

Adding reproduction steps to a bug report is as critical as the bug itself. Reproduction steps allow developers to recreate the bug in their local environment, understand how it is triggered, thus work on resolving the bug faster compared to without providing a step by step guide to reproduce the bug. Without these instructions, fixing a bug would be difficult and time-consuming for the developer.

Since bugs usually occur in alternative flows of process flows and not in basic and expected flows, so it is easy to predict them at the time of software design and provide a method of fixing and solving them.

Though during the bug report it’s not mandatory to suggest a solution to the issue. If a QA engineer found a valid bug then he /she might have an idea on how we fix as well, in that case this is help the developer to see different perspective.

Before providing a solution and/or suggestion, adding reproduction steps (if possible) would be so much appreciated by the developers who will try to fix the bug.

We're missing a step here. Before you fix this bug, you should write an automated test that will allow you to detect and reproduce it. If you skip this, you'll probably never write that test, and you'll experience the same or similar bug after someone else changes the code. This also allows you to know when you're done, when the test fails to reproduce the bug you've fixed it.

QA are the representative of the customers while testing a product or service. They need to do role play for the different users who are going to use this product in reality. So they must have that eye of customer perspective of what situation the product would be used by customers and how any feature or data would impact them in their real lives. Having this eye they can provide suggestions of flow of the functionality and how the results should be.

To help developers easily identify software design bugs, providing reproducibility steps is crucial. Clear, step-by-step instructions allow developers to understand the issue. Sharing environment details such as Operating System, device details, and software versions is essential. Additionally, including screenshots or recordings demonstrating the bug aids developers in understanding the problem swiftly. Since software usage varies, these steps assist in identifying bugs not tested in all environments or devices.

As developers, we owe a great deal of communication to the users of our software. After all, without our users, we would not have any software. This human aspect brings joy: collecting feedback, listening to their problems, solving them, taking responsibility for them, and ultimately delivering a well-intentioned solution to our users. Therefore, following up in both directions is essential!

It's important that you prune your backlog regularly. There will be bugs found and reported that your team hasn't spent effort to fix, but will be fixed by other underlying changes. Retiring old bugs will make your backlog more relevant and less daunting on older systems.

Too often I have seen tickets left open or discarded due to insufficient follow-ups on the resolution. Critical defects need immediate and continuous follow-ups until resolution. Less critical defects should be reviewed and prioritized in backlog grooming. Without such process, these defects pile up in the backlog and are never addressed. This leads to tech debt and longstanding platform issues that bubble up over time. This requires a culture of ownership in the organization that is instilled top-down. The EM and team should track / review defects regularly and the org as a whole should be reviewing defect metrics overtime to understand if there is a steady increase/decrease.

It is important to Avoid spamming the developers with follow-up messages. Give them time to investigate and address the issue.

Just solve the damn thing. Don't wait for people to add it to boards, just beat them to it. The shorter the cycle, the sooner you get feedback.

Not all bugs should be fixed. Practice ruthless prioritization and if you choose to not fix a bug, get it out of the backlog. Some things aren't worth the cost of fixing, find a way to document your evaluation of the bug and close it. If it is reported again, you can quickly dismiss it without having to spend developer resources on analysis.

The person handling the bug will be thankful to understand as much of the context of the incident as possible. In a web application, you can help with this by including critical information in a subtle information display (small, dim font) in the page footer that will be visible in screenshots. Consider including a date/timestamp, session ID, software release version number in this display.

Bugs in the design are usually difficult to report and without an effective reporting strategy they can easily be overlooked as 'just some technical debt' that nobody will ever fix/allocate budget for. Depending on the target audience, two main approaches are, in my experience, effective when reporting a bug in the design: 1. if the audience includes people that are skilled in the technology/language/framework usually pointing to the design principles that violated in the design is an effective enough way to report the issue 2. for less technically skilled people, an effective means of reporting the design bug is with an example (even if only theoretical) on how the code/product could behave badly by not fixing the design bug

Add a post mortem section which explains the possible causes for why the bug was missed during the design and implementation stage. This section will help fix bad programming practices which result in such bugs.