On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Rainer Bielefeld < rainerbielefeld_ooo...@bielefeldundbuss.de> wrote:
> Hi all, > > last weekend I wanted to check whether I can try to use 4.1 for my daily > work with acceptable risk. Using such a trunk version for normal work is a > much more manifold and reliable test than testing with prepared testcases > (what, of course, have to be done, too!). > > I am used to do a query for regressions in trunk, what will allow to check > whether there are known 4.1 regressions affecting my daily work. And > fascinating, my query showed 1 Regression in 200 Bugs with Version 4.1 (I > forgot what one it was). That sounds good, but it is completely implausible > that our 200 unfixed 4.1.0-dev DEFECT bugs all are about new features. And > that tells that information in Bugzilla database is totally unreliable, not > useful for such decisions. > > I already started a review of Bugs in query [1]. Very often Version has > been changed erroneous from an older version to 4.1, sometimes additionally > I see reports with Status "Confirmed" what are no bugs at all (Bug 106106, > Bug 97818), or at least are very unclear (Bug 96263. > Given what you say in this above paragraph, do you have any suggestions on how to "accurately" determine regression status? We may have to construct a custom search using date, etc. > May be some volunteers can assist? > > Best regards > > Rainer > > > > > Hyperlinks: > [1] <https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&; > list_id=130944&namedcmd=410_RegressionTest&remaction=run&sharer_id=8583> > (shared with "canconfirm") > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect." -- James Mason
