Hi Thorsten, On Wednesday 19 May 2010, Thorsten Ziehm wrote:
> I couldn't accept (as a member of the QA project on OOo) that we > have to spend resources of the OOo project to making QA* in OOo > derivatives which doesn't spend resources for this project and > which doesn't contribute their code. Sure, understood, but we are talking about go-oo; go-oo developers contribute code up-stream. > The resources will be missing > for making Quality Assurance for the OOo (vanilla) and will lead > to a worser quality of all OOo derivatives. This isn't acceptable > for me, perhaps for you too. I am afraid I did not explain my proposal well enough, sorry for that :-( Currently, when you, as a QA person, find out that a bug is not present in the up-stream version, you just close it as invalid, which helps no-one - the reporter is just confused, you have to spend time explaining why it is invalid, and go-oo maintainers do not learn about that bug, which - as Charles and Mechtilde pointed out - might in the end affect the perception of the entire OOo. I would like to ask you to try the alias solution I proposed. I have just created a [email protected] user; if you find out that a bug is invalid in up-stream, but the reporter talks about a particular Linux distro (openSUSE, Debian, Ubuntu, ...), just reassign it to [email protected], instead of setting it as 'invalid'. The notification will go to our mailing list ([email protected] at the moment, and I asked for a dedicated one), and no other work for you - we will take care of the rest. Do you think it might work for you, please? Thank you, Kendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
