On Tue, Mar 18, 2014, at 20:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> > Something to keep in mind: we have the ability, in BZ, to send > reminder notes on issues. For example, we can send a note to all > "needmoreinfo" issues untouched for X number of days, warning that the > issue will be closed if there is no response. We could also invite > the reporter to retest with the latest version of AOO. I did such a > cleanup a few years ago, but it is worth repeating every now and then. > If the bug reporter hasn't supplemented more info within 14 days of issue creation, chances are it will never happen. IMHO such reminders are futile. > > I wouldn't mark an ordinary report "needhelp" only because no one has > looked at it yet. > This is not the case, I attach needhelp keyword to issues which require for example a network or a dual monitor or proficiency in samba, java, python etc. - all not in my possession. > > But "needhelp" bugs might be real bugs. Their problem is not lack of > information, but lack of expertise or tools. Do we really want to > lose track of them? I feel worse about marking them as resolved. > Information is not irreversibly erased. Only status will change. > If we can identify a specific QA gap, we can use that as an > opportunity to recruit some more QA volunteers. Especially if there > are themes to which issues are marked "needhelp", we could try to find > volunteers with those specific skills. > > Regards, > > -Rob > IMHO the alternative - leaving bugs which we know we don't have the means to evaluate, Unconfirmed for years, is problematic. Such bugs distract us from other Unconfirmed bugs that we do have the means to evaluate. Old Unconfirmed bugs, no matter what the reason is, don't make us look good. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: qa-h...@openoffice.apache.org
