Hi Nino, That's the beauty of our project, everyone's opinion is respected :) I'll try to avoid adding any work to website team and see what method works best to get these triaged and organized best. As of now, google doc + fdo seems to be doing the trick :) Ultimately might just make a macro to auto sort them once every other week to keep the google doc updated until the "project" is done (ie. getting all bugs >30 days old triaged so we can try to stick with a goal of triaging withing 30 days for new bugs). Thanks for all the valuable input.
Best Regards, Joel On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Nino Novak <nn.l...@kflog.org> wrote: > Am 04.09.2012 23:05 schrieb Joel Madero: > > I agree that FDO has some benefits but the limitation is really that > each user > > is needed to query every time, the possibility of overlap is great, and > no one > > is really responsible for an individual bug until the query is made and > someone > > takes the time to look into it. I'm not sure if others would agree but > it seems > > like having a "group" of 50 or so and being able to just do those at your > > convenience makes people more likely to help and feel like their is an > end in > > sight for "their portion". This is vs. just seeing a never ending list > from FDO > > or even having to "teach" new users (or even not new users) exactly what > to > > search for every time with FDO. > > As for me (a rather unexperienced QA Newbie), I've chosen a somewhat > different > approach: I've first created two custom searches, > > 1) all recent bugs (reported within the last two days) for curiosity (just > to > see what people report recently) > > 2) all UNCONFIRMED bugs from the last 14 days > > From query 2 I picked a couple of bugs every couple of days to > reproduce/confirm/assign/close/whatever seemed appropriate. > > That's just to show a slightly different approach, which is rather simple > and > can be handled perfectly within bugzilla itself without any external tool. > > Ok, the only problem was, that when a person starts reproducing a bug, it > can > happen, that another triager just starts with the very same bug at the same > time. So some kind of lock signal was the only missing thing to prevent > duplication of work. However, this situation did not happen a single time > during > my self-chosen "BugReviewWeek" ;-) > > Another advantage: By the above process nobody (virtually) "blocks" 50 > bugs for > a longer time period. Bugzilla queries are very adequate at every time, as > all > works with live data. > > > > Similar to how developers assign themselves bugs and then can just go > look at > > their own bugs ("My Bugs") it would be nice to have this ability for QA > triagers > > but have it somewhat automated since it's just triaging, not > programming. In the > > long run (once we're through the back log of 650+ that are really old), > it would > > be amazing if we had a team of QA staff that signed up to have bugs "auto > > assigned" to them for triaging. > > We have the libreoffice-bugs@fdo mailing list, which contains (nearly?) > every > new bug. Could we use it somehow for this purpose? E.g. by replying to a > bug or > forwarding it to the qa list or some such? (Just thoughts, nothing > concrete) > > > > What I imagine: > > > > QA triagers "sign up" for components they are willing to triage and > their "max" > > load > > New bug is reported, if the bug has a component listed the bug gets "auto > > assigned" for triaging purposes according to some rule(s) > > Personally, I prefer not to sign up for a special component but to pick a > recent > bug which kind of "attracts" me spontanously. But there might be other > opinions/preferences/arguments/approaches. > > > > For now the google docs works, FDO does not as it is now but I'll > discuss this > > further with Bjoern, Petr & Rainer to see if we can come up with > something more > > functional than the chaos that is FDO :) Or maybe I'm just not familiar > enough > > with FDO to really feel comfortable myself with it, this is more likely > than not > > true :) > > :-) > > I like your initiative. Please don't feel discouraged by my comments, I > just > wanted to add a slightly different view. If people like your approach, > that's > great! It does not contradict to mine (IMHO), as it's rather obvious if a > bug > has been triaged or not. So we can all work together towards our common > goal. > > Regards, > Nino >
_______________________________________________ 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/