incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "O.Felka" <olaf-openoff...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: [QA] Quality of bug reports and QA in bugzilla
Date Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:15:11 GMT
Mee too:
-1

Regards,
Olaf

Am 20.09.2012 15:55, schrieb Yong Lin Ma:
> -1.
>
> Herbert,
> I would like to save you the effort to make the change, even if it
> won't cost much.
>
> The key thing here is we should be careful and avoid opening duplicate
> or invalid issues as many as we can.
>
> I would like to see some concrete examples, especially invalid issues.
> And see if this is pervasive for all the reporters who have confirm
> right.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Herbert Duerr <hdu@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 19.09.2012 20:34, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 02:24:11PM +0200, Oliver Brinzing wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Regina,
>>>>
>>>>> Your own new issue should be UNCONFIRMED. Someone else should confirm
>>>>> your issue, if possible on a different operating system.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i am pretty sure that i did not set the "confirmed" status when
>>>> submitting a new issue,
>>>> default status is "confirmed" - and you have to select "Show Advanced
>>>> Fields"
>>>> to see the listbox ... this seems to be the root cause of the problem ...
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Oliver, the default status should be set to UNCONFIRMED
>>> even if the reporter has canconfirm privileges. IMHO "confirmed" means
>>> "confirmed by some else".
>>
>>
>> Seeing so much consensus I'm confident that we'll reach "lazy consensus" by
>> next monday (2012/9/19 + 72h) and I volunteer to change the behavior then.
>>
>> So please speak up now if you disagree with the opinion that the extra step
>> to the "confirmed" status is an idea that does benefit the quality of our
>> project.
>>
>> Herbert
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message