Hi Bjoern, all, Le 17/01/2014 12:01, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit : > Hi, > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 06:21:48PM +0000, Michael Meeks wrote: >> + All Most Annoying Bugs -> priority Highest (Bjoern) > > This is done now too, so right now, all NEW bugs(*) with priority highest > should > also block a MAB and all NEW bugs blocking a MAB should be priority highest. > > I updated the MAB instructions to include setting "priority: highest" when > adding a bug to MAB. > > for QA, this means two things, one short term, one long term. > > == short term == > > To keep the highest=MAB equivalence clean, some regular (weekly?) checking for > bugs that are priority:highest and not a MAB would be needed. Such bugs could > be seen as "proposed MABs" and either be: > - promoted to a MAB with the usual procedure (rationale etc.) > - or respectfully rejected and bumped to priority:high > > Someone volunteering for this task? > > If so, it would be interesting: > - how many such bugs there are each week > - what is their quality (as in: how many are good MABs? how many are well > triaged?) >
For information, I've forwarded and translated your mail to our qa list. I'll have a look today to those bugs having priority:highest and not in the Mab yet. Cheers Sophie _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice