incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Java 7 and Apache OpenOffice
Date Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:27:02 GMT
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:
> Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>>
>> Now I'm uncertain about what to do in these cases. In OpenOffice.org
>> times, the developer who fixed the issue didn't resolve it as fixed.
>> Someone else had to do the QA in order to confirm the fix and change the
>> issue status.
>
>
> Wasn't the cycle something like the following?
> - Developer thinks the bug is fixed and marks issue as RESOLVED FIXED.
> - QA engineer sets to VERIFIED, then to CLOSED.
>
> The workflow you describe seems overly complex, but indeed you may well be
> right: it wouldn't be the only overly complex procedure in the old
> OpenOffice.org...
>

The value of having a QA engineer test a bug fix is they also "test
around" the fix, to make sure related areas are not broken.   If we
want CRT, then maybe it is a good thing if the person doing the review
is not the same person who did the commit?


>
>> I'm not sure what the new rules are, so I will wait to resolve this as
>> fixed until someone can confirm it is actually fixed.
>
>
> So the VERIFIED and CLOSED status would be for further verification? Or
> maybe for the moment when the fix can be independently verified in a
> developer snapshot? Leaving a resolved issue as STARTED seems like a
> suboptimal workflow.
>
> Regards,
>  Andrea.

Mime
View raw message