On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 06:30:30PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: > We can change our opinion on these questions, and then the "intended > branches" set changes.
Yes, but everytime we change our opinion on this, possibly the bug state would need to change, which is why Im not too happy with this. > So if you go to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 (LO > 3.5 MAB), you have to click through on *each* resolved bug to read the > bug log and try to see if there is a "fixed in 3.5.x" comment (or > possibly look in whiteboard for a target:3.5", so that you can > evaluate whether it is still relevant, or if action is needed? > This makes it IMHO too easy for a bug to "slip under the radar" and be > forgotten. Why not just query for target 3.5.x in whiteboard? > In the ESC call agenda, we have MAB statistics that say e.g. > > * 3.5 most annoying bugs ... > + 81 open (of 269) older 73/258 73/257 76/256 75/253 77/253 73/250 > 72/249 > 30% 26% 28% 30% 30% 30% 29% 29% > + > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=37361&hide_resolved=1 While this is also queryable, Im not too happy with the MAB concept in the long run anyway -- Petr suggested we should try to move to getting the bug priorities right if we get the manpower for it in QA. That should be a lot better to query in the end. > We could consider automoving on RC release rather than final release? I personally would stick with finals, RCs are prereleases just like daily builds. Best, Bjoern _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
