Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE1DB9A2C for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:33:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33306 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jan 2012 15:33:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 33189 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jan 2012 15:32:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 33181 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jan 2012 15:32:59 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:32:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of tjfrazier@cfl.rr.com designates 75.180.132.120 as permitted sender) Received: from [75.180.132.120] (HELO cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com) (75.180.132.120) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:32:50 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=ad3jbGUt c=1 sm=0 a=4Jz+jJ0YjisZbq4FujTDrw==:17 a=mU5CzuQmXxAA:10 a=Ymp2iiNeL_gA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=4VL-5K9eywkRD5VmVFwA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=4Jz+jJ0YjisZbq4FujTDrw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 68.205.107.180 Received: from [68.205.107.180] ([68.205.107.180:49325] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by cdptpa-oedge04.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id A0/EF-01110-B0FCE1F4; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:32:28 +0000 Message-ID: <4F1ECF04.1050508@cfl.rr.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:32:20 -0500 From: TJ Frazier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Bugzilla Administration Ideas References: <4F1ECBEC.5080608@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <4F1ECBEC.5080608@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 1/24/2012 10:19, Herbert Duerr wrote: > I'm starting a thread on what should be done in our Bugzilla. > > Here are some ideas: > > - remove fields that confuse more than they help to describe or solve > the problem, e.g. the fields "Hardware" > > - reduce field choices, e.g. for the field "OS" the options "Windows > 3.1", "Mac System 7" or "OpenVMS" should go > > - if the default owner of a component is no longer active in the project > then that should be changed to a generic name > > - if it is possible at all then add a hierarchy to the components, e.g. > all the localization projects should go into a l10 group, e.g. l10/ja > > - if it is possible to reduce the choice of impacted versions when a new > issue is entered then that should be done. Bugs reported against ancient > milestones such as 644m11 are just not interesting Here there is a small problem. We need to know, eventually, two different version numbers: the earliest version that shows the problem, and the latest version tested. In the past, the "reported" version was supposed to be the earliest ("oo.o 3.2.1"), and the user should add something like, "also fails under 3.4 Beta". We could do a better job of making this clear, or maybe we need another field, or both. /tj/ > > Herbert > >