Re: [Libreoffice-qa] what happened to Reiner?

[bfo]

Tommy wrote
>> Retiered some time ago [can't find thread]. Very sad
> Ok, I was afraid that he left the project...
> anyway he did a very good job here and everybody will welcome him if he  
> comes back.

He did:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Role-of-the-QA-calls-tp4052308.html



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-what-happened-to-Reiner-tp4064927p4065008.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Stagnant NEEDINFO bugs

[bfo]

Hi!
My proposal:

e) a reminder at major version + automated closing of bug report after first
major.maintenance version if a reminder is last comment (which means no
activity)

This will give bugs cleaning every 6 months. Not a bad deal...
Most of bugs in NEEDINFO state are dead ends. Reporters in general think
that people who triage are LO experts in every way. A reminder text should
convince them, that the easier STR the better. Even very complicated issue
can be reproduced with a "download'n'run" test case attached . BTW: I really
liked graphics made by one reporter in bug
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51162.
IMHO all this should include also UNCONFIRMED bugs (many are dead ends too). 
I see bug reporting in this project not like "file and forget" process.
Reminder text should encourage the reporter to get involved a little bit
more, as he is an expert about reported bug, at least confirming it with
latest major version.
Also having a subpage for dealing with UNCONFIRMED or NEEDINFO bugs in
Bugzilla would make life easier.
Such page is available for instance in bmo (bugzilla.mozilla.org). 
Link: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=triage_reports.html. 
Source is available at:
http://bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/4.0/annotate/head:/extensions/BMO/template/en/default/pages/triage_reports.html.tmpl
In short (their implementation):
- Show UNCONFIRMED bugs with: [Product] [Component]
- Comment:
-- where the last commenter: is the reporter, does not have canconfirm, is
[set user]
-- where the last comment is older than: 30/60/90 days, one year, the date
[set date]
I played with it for a while and it is very friendly, especially  for
unexperienced Bugzilla users.
In our version this should support UNCONFIRMED and NEEDINFO statuses and
maybe reminder IDs, to browse the bugs before the next step (if one is
concerned that important issues will be closed).
It would be a great companion for triage marathons.
Best regards.
P.S.
Everything has to be done to not repeat last incident with 3 or 4 messages
added to selected issues.  This was PITA for everyone.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Stagnant-NEEDINFO-bugs-tp4032113p4032419.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013

[bfo]

jmadero wrote
> One of the main issues is that FDO doesn't allow you to go from RESOLVED 
> - WORKSFORME back to UNCONFIRMED. 

Hi!
Not true. RESOLVED WORKSFORME>UNCONFIRMED transition is possible with
current fdo status workflow. Just checked that moment ago myself. See this
bug activity: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_activity.cgi?id=45941
Best regards.





--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Minutes-QA-Call-11-16-2012-tp4019790p403.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013

[bfo]

jmadero wrote
> If you mark a bug as WFM, you are unable to go directly back to
> UNCONFIRMED - which for me 
> is strange, I understand if it's marked as FIXED but WFM shouldn't block 
> you from doing UNCONFIRMED again.

Hi!
Are you sure about that? See this bug activity table:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_activity.cgi?id=46254.
WFM>UNCONFIRMED transition there.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Minutes-QA-Call-11-16-2012-tp4019790p4030926.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug Status NEW but Assigned to Someone - Please Change

[bfo]

Pedro wrote
> There is no point in triaging again. The QA work is done. Now only Devs
> can fix or don't fix confirmed bugs.
> Assigning to someone is not a good idea. It seems like that person is
> going to act on the problem when in fact he/she didn't select the issue.


David Tardon wrote
> I think explicitly setting a bug to ASSIGNED is pretty much pointless.
> You cannot force a developer to start working on a bug just because he
> has been assigned to it; on the other side, seeing that a bug is already
> assigned might discourage others from taking it.

Seems my post was misunderstood. My intention wasn't assigning bugs to
anyone by QA people. 
Simply developers should change status to ASSIGNED when they are actively
working on fix, leaving Assigned to as default when bug is in NEW state. Not
everyone do it, some bugs have sudden NEW>FIXED transition. 
Also bugs are fixed without any report in the Bugzilla. You have to watch
commit messages and changelogs to get the idea. This complicates work while
triaging.


Pedro wrote
> You can not force people (especially volunteers) to fix anything they
> don't feel like.
> That is the nature of this project. It is frustrating but this is how it
> works.
> Unless you know how to code and fix the problem yourself, this is as far
> as you can go.

Wrote it few times already, will write it once more - you can manage bugs
even in the open source project. This will be more wishful thinking (more
like Please fix this in next maintenance release), but it is possible. 
Having release fever (core developers as firemen) is not good policy for bug
fixing.  I believe people would consider to fix things when there is clear
indication that a fix is needed and expected sooner than later. Just put
yourself in the shoes of new developer who browse 3700 NEW bugs. Impossible
to pick anything.


David Tardon wrote
> There are only so many developers. And to fix a bug typically takes more
> time than to triage it.

I have a few examples already that well triaged bug is fixable within hours
when it got dev attention somehow. Not general rule of course.


David Tardon wrote
> Similarly, setting a
> confirmed bug to WONTFIX just before nobody has fixed it in a certain
> period of time (if we really do not want to/cannot fix it, it should
> have already been marked appropriately during triage) brings us no
> positive effect (except having smaller number of opened bugs--maybe).
> One negative effect that immediately comes to mind is that all the
> triaging work will need to be repeated from scratch the next time
> someone reports the same bug. 

In real life you have to triage every single bug anyway. Check for
duplicates first. If you have WONTIXed bugs already (good reasoned in
comments) you can triage faster by simply marking another bug as a
duplicate. I am not an expert to mark any bugs as WONTFIX. This should be
done by core developers. They would need to discuss new NEW bugs regularly.


David Tardon wrote
> Therefore, the only possible reason for a
> triaging marathon like you suggested is to identify (and dispose of)
> bugs already fixed in the newest release (or, preferably, master).

Exactly this should be done some day. Unfortunately QA guys are too busy
with Unconfirmed backlog.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-Bug-Status-NEW-but-Assigned-to-Someone-Please-Change-tp4029440p4029666.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug Status NEW but Assigned to Someone - Please Change

[bfo]

jmadero wrote
> Rainer, I'll start the conversation on QA list shortly, it might move to
> the next call but I think there is room for improvement here.

Hi!
In LibreOffice product we have:
- more than 4000 bugs in NEW state -
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/reports.cgi?product=LibreOffice&datasets=NEW
- only little more than 200 are ASSIGNED -
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/reports.cgi?product=LibreOffice&datasets=ASSIGNED

Of those NEW bugs 3733 are assigned to
libreoffice-b...@lists.freedesktop.org (Of course there is more than 800
enhancement requests, but this doesn't improve the whole picture very much.)
-
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/report.cgi?bug_status=NEW&cumulate=0&product=LibreOffice&x_axis_field=bug_severity&y_axis_field=assigned_to&width=600&height=350&action=wrap&format=table

I read this data as NEW backlog - nobody is interested in those reports.
IMHO QA hard work to transform a bug into NEW state is pretty much wasted,
as I consider NEW stated bugs as ready to start fixing...
We are in need of NEW triaging marathon. ASSIGN, RESOLVE or WONTFIX to clear
the room for new NEW bugs...
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-Bug-Status-NEW-but-Assigned-to-Someone-Please-Change-tp4029440p4029487.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-design] Send Feedback Option

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
>   I wonder - Mozilla have done a lot of this work before us - can we
> re-use their backend infrastructure and share development work on that ?
> it'd suck to re-invent all their data analytics / query processing
> etc. ?

Hi!
They are friendly people. All of this is on github:
https://github.com/mozilla and some screencast about their technology are
here https://air.mozilla.org (unfortunately there is no catalog or tags, you
have to browse pages).
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-libreoffice-design-Send-Feedback-Option-tp4021508p4021668.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [libreoffice-design] Send Feedback Option

[bfo]

Stefan Knorr (Astron)-2 wrote
> here's a link to an HTML mockup:
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/87946285/libreoffice/feedback/feedback-page.html

Hi!
Did you think about setting up LibreOffice Feedback page using Mozilla
software? It's code is available at github:
https://github.com/mozilla/input.mozilla.org
Skin this, make links to other LO resources and you have a ready to go
system, quite important for any hot issues and quality in general.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-libreoffice-design-Send-Feedback-Option-tp4021508p4021626.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Stats I plotted + Getting rid of bugs - appealing

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> If we would have 10 people who do an extra review per day for 
> the Bugs from Florians queries, we would be through before next spring. 

Hi!
It is possible, but I am concerned about another thing. Look at this chart: 
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/reports.cgi?product=LibreOffice&datasets=NEW
There are already more than 3500 bugs ready to go for developers. What good
if we add another 1000 (with current backlog in UNCONFIRMED it is possible)?
Looking at regressions' and MABs' stats every week you have to be a very
strong mental person to continue playing with bugs... You put an effort and
energy to process them, but the stack is growing anyway. It is sisyphean
work...
The real problem is that there is no roadmap to fix those issues. More, in
my opinion, without Component managers, responsible for nominating those
bugs for each maintenance release (wishful thinking enabled), considering
current rate of closing max. 8 Bugzilla bugs daily, it is simply impossible. 
On the other way HardHack nomination process and fixing rate is quite good
example that when you show which bugs should be fixed, this could work and
better the quality of the product. The time has come to introduce this on a
massive scale. I would propose to fight dataloss and regressions first.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Stats-I-plotted-Getting-rid-of-bugs-tp4016541p4016629.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of the QA Call tomorrow, Tuesday 1300UTC

[bfo]

Sophie Gautier wrote
>> I would propose to use QA Contact field for this purpose, at least when
>> in
>> the processing (translation, gathering more details) phase. 
> If it could be the qa@fr list, then it's ok.

Hi!
This have to be Bugzilla registered account. If there is one for qa@fr, then
it could be added.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-QA-Call-tomorrow-Tuesday-1300UTC-tp4014857p4016156.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of the QA Call tomorrow, Tuesday 1300UTC

[bfo]

Sophie Gautier wrote
> I've discussed the process with our FR team and they are ok to handle it.

Hi!
Great to hear that! All we need now is a list of people, by language, who
can be cc'ed to work on the bug
when it has non English summary and seems to be a valid report at first
sight.

Sophie Gautier wrote
> We have to make sure that the bug filled on BZ will be tagged as already
> managed by our team (nobody to search on duplicates again or tests on
> other OS, version etc.) and that they will marked as confirmed or even
> assigned to somebody.

I would propose to use QA Contact field for this purpose, at least when in
the processing (translation, gathering more details) phase. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-QA-Call-tomorrow-Tuesday-1300UTC-tp4014857p4015886.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of the QA Call tomorrow, Tuesday 1300UTC

[bfo]

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
> - in theory, it is possible to make the BSA file bugs without the
> reporter registering (Petr/Bjoern)
>   - without keeping the original reporter in the loop, bug report
> quality will only get worse

Hi.
Anonymous bug reports would be more or less useless, unless you are thinking
about implementing crash platforms like https://crash-stats.mozilla.com
where anonymous reports are processed and users can check current status of
their reports along with assigned bug numbers (about:crashes in Firefox for
instance). 
Already some bug reports need heavy QA involvement (lots of time and e-mail
judo skills) to be polished and prepared for interested developers.
To be honest, with a current backlog,  a lot of them should be RESOLVED
INVALIDated and not babysitted. 
I just can't imagine what would happen when we could be flooded by anonymous
fillings... 

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
> - the idea to create to send the bug to a mailing list for review
> instead
>   of blindly creating a bug is interesting (Bjoern)

In some way DUPS are good (see 3.6 release) - properly DUPED bugs will
become hot issues in an instant at Most Frequently Reported Bugs for
LibreOffice page. 
But please, no more alternative bug reports channels! I would like to see
all bugs in Bugzilla and not have to search for bugs scattered through
dozens of MLs or wiki pages. I recently have found that some users are
already lost with BSA (https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/) and
Bugzilla (https://bugs.freedesktop.org). Just reviewed few incomplete,
invalid, duplicate, with strange comments (a person is writing in the bug
that he do not know what he has written and is writing it once again,
differently, in the same, initial bug (?)). Seems people do not recognize
what BSA is all about and by adding a bug there are creating Bugzilla
account and adding a bug to Bugzilla itself (some do not understand that
fact). I really would like to see BSA as build-in in bugs.freedesktop.org,
than as a seperate product (best as this example template adapted -
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=LibreOffice&format=guided).
Please remember that already LibreOffice as a product has a lot of bug
trackers out there...

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
>  we could do a testdrive of this with those l10n communities that have
> enough manpower to handle the incoming native language reports:
> - portuguese/brazil
> - french
> - german 

Bug reports not in English are a problem - I think that getting people ready
to translate the bug and chat with the reporter in his native language is a
great idea. But only when a good summary comment is added to original bug
report in Bugzilla. In English. I would CC such people asking for help now
and then.
Best regards.
 




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-QA-Call-tomorrow-Tuesday-1300UTC-tp4014857p4015045.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New Easy Hack Tracking System -- Developer Input Required

[bfo]

Hi!
Recently I stumbled upon two open source projects (sources are available on
github) to get more volunteers by their interests:
- in bugs department - see http://www.joshmatthews.net/bugsahoy/
- in the development area - see http://whatcanidoformozilla.org/
Those are very simple sites, where you can just pick up what is interesting
to you. You will receive bugs or more informations. Would be cool to discuss
implementing those. Maybe as Easy Hack even.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-New-Easy-Hack-Tracking-System-Developer-Input-Required-tp4013528p4014061.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LDTP now works for Linux, Win & Mac

[bfo]

Thorsten Behrens wrote
> Hi there,
> seen this today -
> 
> http://nagappanal.blogspot.de/2012/10/ann-automated-testing-on-mac-atomac-101.html
> Did anyone have experience (positive & negative) with that tool?
> Cheers,
> -- Thorsten

Hi.
See
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246.html
for some thoughts...
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-LDTP-now-works-for-Linux-Win-Mac-tp4013125p4013160.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Should we use the "QA Contact" field?

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> I don't think so, and I don't see any benefit what we can have from 
> adding people there.

Hi.
Adding user (by herself) to QA Contact field would indicate, that this QA
person is actively working on the bug and is responsible either for
(examples):
- gathering more informations, when QA Wanted action is triggered by the
developer
- delivering BT
- creating bug summary when nominated for HardHacks
- is available to check the bug when it is platform specific
- janitor the bug
- will give assistance to the developer when needed
Adding people just to the CC list do not indicate what is going on with the
bug on QA side.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Should-we-use-the-QA-Contact-field-tp4008500p4009939.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Reporting Ignorant User on FDO?

[bfo]

Hi.
If you do not like the f-word (English profanities in general), then
Profanivore extension
(http://bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/4.2/files/head:/extensions/Profanivore/) could
be adapted and installed in Bugzilla.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Reporting-Ignorant-User-on-FDO-tp4006916p4009937.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] bibisect fro windows

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> 
> I will try at QA weekend.
> 
Hi.
You could use this Impress regression introduced as faulty comment commit as
a test case and example.
Thread:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/master-regression-PPT-load-tp4002760.html
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-bibisect-fro-windows-tp4002219p4003439.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice code coverage

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

Michael Stahl-2 wrote
> 
>> Did anyone make such report for LibreOffice codebase? 
> no, unfortunately we don't know how the unit test coverage ranks exactly
> on a scale from "far too low" to "infinitesimal" :-/
> 
Hi.
Thanks to work of John Smith such report is available at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/lcov_reports/.
Any comments?
Best regards.



___
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-code-coverage-tp3994901p4003168.html

To unsubscribe from LibreOffice code coverage, visit 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=3994901&code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTQ5MDF8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>> There is one already - Bugzilla. I think devs should be teached how to
>> use
>> Bugzilla more.
>   :-) Sure - but a developer's daily interaction involves using many bug
> trackers - from LibreOffice, to SUSE, RedHat, Deb-bugs, Apache Issues,
> etc. having a single page that lets you get to them easily can be nice.
> 
Hi.
This is another major problem... 

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   I agree that wiki pages don't help; but having a convenient developer
> default-page that makes it easy to get to the bugs you want - and also
> prompts you with the last 5x new regressions, and a competitive
> component vs. component bug chart and ... - might do some good. No doubt
> it could all be done in a pile of Javascript or something :-)
> 
Anyway such dashboard could be done like this:
Sample screenshot -
http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9753/bugzilladashboard.jpg
Tool -
http://toolness.github.com/bugzilla-dashboard/#username=[bugzilla.mozilla.org
username]
All this can be done using Bugzilla integrated APIs (or BzAPI
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:REST_API) with a help of some mediawiki
addons - nice examples:
http://christian.legnitto.com/blog/2012/04/18/new-mediawiki-bugzilla-feature/
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4002780.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Moztrap, some questions

[bfo]

Hi.
tl;dr, but IMHO ideal localized MozTrap system could be designed this way:
Tests should be written using some kind of special text editor with
autocomplete, in generic language (or based on English) using UI strings and
then those strings substituted to the language of choice (not only French).
The framework should be using .po files only.  How to achieve this? I don't
know. Maybe integrate with Pootle server or sync with LO sources? This would
allow to present UI strings in any language supported by LibreOffice. All
this seems like good candidate for GSOC project...
My 2 eurocents.
Best regards.
P.S.
Having multilanguage MozTrap can lead us to multilanguage reports in
Bugzilla... We do not want multilanguage Bugzilla, don't we? I already have
to use translator services in reports submitted by French or Spanish people.
Good to learn new languages, but... you know... time consuming while bugs
triage.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Moztrap-some-questions-tp4000922p4001926.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   Of course the filters are tested; there were -zero- unit tests for the
> RTF filter before we started, it is now perhaps -the- most unit tested
> filter that there is - every bug fix Miklos makes has a nice unit test:
> better - since the code is shared, that is unit testing a big chunk of
> the DOCX and perhaps DOC filtering as well.
> 
Hi!
I noticed that, as I am forced to watch commits to know what is going on in
the projects. Good work, should be a part of commit workflow, but IMHO such
tests should be placed in the code before importing it to stable branch as a
general rule and good coding practice.

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   Wow - I didn't hear about that; can you give me a few links ? did you
> use a Windows build with debugging symbols (if not the traces would be
> next-to-useless sadly).
> 
Sure. BTW: if you can make that this page will get a professional review -
that would be great.
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/How_to_get_a_backtrace_with_WinDbg

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> Unfortunately there are problems, the Windows symbol
> server is IIRC some hideous tangled Microsoft proprietary product that
> requires a Windows server to push a few binary files (que?). This
> complicates matters.
> 
As you can read in the bug resources I gathered Mozilla guys did it, along
with Bug reporting stuff. Whoever is working on it can ask those friedly
people for help. One should not reinvent the wheel again and again...

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
>   
> Is there a good list of such bugs ?
> AFAICS we need a good way to get nice work (like your bugs with
> backtraces) communicated to development in such a way that they notice &
> do something about it :-) Not sure how to do that - bloating the MAB
> list is prolly not it though - creative ideas appreciated.
> 
We should be using Bugzilla and its features - keywords, shared searches,
tags, custom fields, flags (per component maybe). 

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
>   
>   One thing I'd like to do is make a developers' portal - we can use as a
> homepage, with easy-to-use boxes to lookup bug numbers, and interesting
> reports on the page: that might be rather a good way of advertising the
> latest problems :-)
> 
There is one already - Bugzilla. I think devs should be teached how to use
Bugzilla more. It is a monster at first sight, but it can be your best pet
after a while. Creating multiple resources, like devs portals, special wiki
pages etc. won't help.
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001184.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] top #n bugs tracking ...

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   So - I like the idea of highlighting a small set of the most critical
> bugs each-week - say five; and having them linked in the ESC minutes
> with a small write-up. Of course that would need to be generated by QA.
>   The bit that is unworkable in the above is the problem of starting QA
> in earnest only at RC1 :-) That is is -way- too late. We have to be
> doing QA on master, Betas etc.
> [...]
>   Why is RC1 -way- too late ? The time it takes to get a fix made,
> tested, reviewed and included into the next RC is sufficiently long that
> being certain that bugs fixed in RC1 are truly fixed without knock-on
> regressions by the time we hit RC3 is already not optimal.
> 
Hi.
In my proposal I was thinking about maintenance releases only. Constant QA
on master, Betas I am taking for granted. So, proposed workflow would be
like this (based on 3.6.1 and 3.6.2):
3.6.1 release 
at RC1  Week 33, Aug 13 - Aug 19, 2012 - start of nominations of bugs, which
should be fixed in 3.6.2 
at RC2  Week 34, Aug 20 - Aug 26, 2012  - list ready, reviewed by QA, picked
minimum number of bugs - maybe goal of 5-10 bugs  per release will be
achievable? interested devs can assign the bugs to themselves
3.6.2 release
Hard code freeze & branch libreoffice-3-6-2 Week 38, Sep 17 - Sep 23, 2012
- bugs from nomination list VERIFIED FIXED
at RC1  Week 38, Sep 17 - Sep 23, 2012  - list empty or number of bugs <
minimum goal - nomination is started


This is of course apart from all other bug fixing and QA activity. Details
to be discussed.


Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   On the other hand, getting some top #5 bugs chewed over at the ESC call
> each week from Beta0 onwards sounds like it would be a worthwhile thing
> to do. Of course, there is no guarantee they get fixed and this data
> should already existing in the MAB tracker for the next release - but it
> might be helpful to get wider exposure.
> 
Would be happy to see that going on... Please remember that old bugs are
mostly in the master anyway.

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   Are you volunteering to write that ? if so, the ESC agenda goes out
> tomorrow ;-)
> 
I know that there is propose=do it scheme on this ML and it is rude to have
excuses but at the moment I want to dedicate myself to bugs triage... 
Backlog it this area is enormous. 
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001017.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
>   The reason I graph regressions each week is to try to add focus there;
> if you can think of another more encouraging way - that'd be
> appreciated.
> 
Hi.
Unfortunately those graphs are discouraging in many ways. Especially if one
thinks about upgrading LO...

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> We (the ESC) made a strategic
> decision to take some regressions there - in order to have much greater
> sharing of the filter code, such that we have less code, and hence our
> bug fixes have more impact across all Microsoft import and export
> filters. 
> 
Does QA OKeyed this decision? What QA actions were taken before such move?
Regression tests prepared? Any tests in general? Manual tests?

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> There is testing before committing. 
> 
Tests as regression tests or tests as is it green on tinderbox or it builds
on commiter's computer?

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> One strategic thing we -badly- need is the ability to get stack traces
> with full symbols out of QA. With
> that information we can double or better the productivity of bug fixing
> - without it we are half-blind.
> 
I am starting to doubt that it helps. I recently delivered Windows bt to
most crash bugs I could find. Prepared wiki page about it. Asked for review
of that page. Silence. Few of the bugs were fixed, without any comment if my
bt was useful. Will keep this work, but I don't see that bugs with bts are
fixed quicker.
 
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> Fridrich has been working on getting stack traces / symbol servers
> setup for Windows for the last several months; he is currently on
> vacation - no doubt he'll give an update on that when he gets back. It
> is an enduring frustration to me to be missing that piece.
> 
I think I put few cents for this myself on ML and trying to gather nice
resources in bug https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50350. Someone
is working on it? Great. It is still UNCONFIRMED...
 
Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> It's really not clear to me what you're looking for: surely you're not
> asking for the whole project to stop working on features, and focus
> exclusively on bugs for a year ;-) that seems an unrealistic expectation
> to me - we have to move forward as well as fix our huge legacy of bugs,
> as well as the new bugs we create. 
> 
I would be happy if I achieve the change in base workflow - new feature in
the codebase? Splendid! But unit tests, testcases and manual testing done
before commiting. QA OKeyed the feature? Then you can commit.
Focusing exclusively on bugs in one of next release (be it 3.7 or 3.8) would
be a great idea, as please remember - a feature is a no go, when there are
still 123bugs (123bugs as one, two, three actions needed to get LO crash).
Also, if I understand correctly, from 3.7 there will be a possibility to
introduce working patches from a sister project. It would be great to bury
the hatchet and improve both kids at once. 
Best regards.





--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4001009.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Jochen wrote
> 
>> We need a strategy with a positive, encouraging motto for the developers.
> 
Hi.
Strategy is simple - the time has come to manage bugs better. I could be
mistaken, it is still difficult to me to gather informations from all LO
resources, but I think that today some QA people are CCing experts asking
for a bug fix.
I am in doubt that this works. Some kind of Bugfix campaign has to start. 
Mottos? I am not a marketing expert nor a good gfx artist to prepare
posters, but we could use some catchy slogans on wiki pages or mailing to
get devs more involved in fixing them. As probably you noticed, I mention
Mozilla very, very often in my postings. Well, they have good ideas. Make
awful mistakes and have their problems (recent Firefox and Flash situation)
but are IMHO better organized and have a big bunch of tooling. Yes, I am
aware that Mozilla have their QA full time employees, but dedicated
volunteers are not unique. At MozCamp Europe 2011 held in Berlin a campaign
for Firefox Mobile testers was present all around the venue
(https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/Testdrivers_Program). Posters
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/lhirlimann/6375704453/), stickers were
everywhere. I think that LO conference in Berlin is a good opportunity to
have Bug squashing draft (this include devs and QA). Examples? I paraphrased
few well known slogans to sell this idea (posters, stickers, t-shirts?):

Bugs - everyone loses. Help to fix them.
Volunteers wanted! Call 999-FIX-BUGS now!
Became The king of bugfixing!
The bugfixer 14 - come to the sourcecode soon!
100% certified bugfixer
We find bugs 
We fix bugs
If you want to impress someone, show him your bugfix list
Fix bugs, live better!
For the men in charge of bugfixing
Bugfixing. I'm lovin it. (R)
Bugfixing. Just do it (R)
Bugfixing. F* good and tasty!
Bugfixing. Does she?
Bugfixing. Does he?
Bugfixing. Are you?
I am with bugfixer
I fix, 'cause I can
Fix it your way!
Reach out and fix something.
Find it. Assign it. Fix it.
Keep going and going and going...
I'm in Resolved Fixed Team.
Have you fixed your bug today?
Are you Resolved Fixed?

Call for bugs (CFB).
I think that CFB should be introduced in the release schedule (example
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/3.6). When to do it and how
is another matter. I think that when RC1 is released a CFB should be started
and bugfixing planned when RC2 is released (2 weeks are enough?). Bugs
should be nominated by QA from ESC stats - regressions and MAB list. Hard
code freeze is in next 4 weeks, so the question is - how many bugs can be
fixed in 4 weeks? Please remember that today we are talking about >70 MABs
and >170 regressions.  Branch is in 6 months cycle. So, 10 bugs a week will
be enough.. not. Please remember that we still have >2500 bugs to triage.
Some minimum should be set by ESC as a goal. Even the open source community
have to be managed.

To motivate volunteers TDF could join (surprise surprise) Mozilla initiative
of Open Badges system (http://www.openbadges.org/en-US/
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Badges/About http://planet.openbadges.org/). Some
LibreOffice badges could be developed, like:
- certified LibreOffice user
- c. LO developer (builder, gerriter)
- c. LO supporter (educator, implementer, translator, templates)
- c. QA member (tester, triager, test wrtiter, researcher, bibisecter,
moztraper)
This can help to build active community and make people proud. Requirements
for above should be set.
(http://ask.libreoffice.org have their badges - does it work?)

All in all the backlog in bugs, regressions and crashers need urgent
attention and detailed plan how to get things done. The sooner, the better.
When bugs/regressions/crasher situation will be under control, QA could let
the devs to rewrite everything. Of course only when testplans, automation
and proper code testing procedures are implemented. But that is another
matter which should be discussed.

Best regards.
P.S.
Other issues to discuss:
- central crash report data system - enable build in crash reporter - detect
hot issues
- http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FindTheExpert - experts involvement in
CFB
- does releasing branch starter with known dataloss regressions (already
fixed!) makes sense?
- 4 weeks cycle - not too often for proper testing, bug fixing? 
- beta, rc, master users (numbers, reports)




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000667.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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:/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
> 
> I dont think discussing this on a mailing list will help us find the
> silver
> bullet to the problems you describe. However, you are most invited to just
> us
> on the next QA Call on August, 23rd 2012 1400UTC, discussing these topics
> on
> the phone is usually a lot more constructive.
> 
Hi.
Thanks. I am not available in the working hours and really prefer text than
voice. Everyone can comment and brainstorm here.
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000495.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> 
> For some of these bugs simply the Bug description still is not 
> satisfying so that I can understand developers that they pick bugs where 
> they can start fixing with out much additional preliminary research. 
> 
Hi!
Sometimes I am not even sure that devs use Bugzilla and read comments...
Anyway they can use NEEDINFO status with a short comment and skip the bug or
maybe qawanted keyword for such research request should be introduced. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000483.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Jochen wrote
> 
> IMHO has bfo some right. But:
> 1) "bankruptcy of this system" is a little bit exaggerated.
> 
Hi!
Not at all. After reviewing >400 bugs (and counting) I could double 3.5MAB
numbers in an instant. 
The main problem is that MAB is a battlefield for users without QA control
and devs IMHO are in other parts of the LO world (and nobody, I say nobody
will ever browse >300 comments bug). Just see 3.5MAB stats in ESC minutes -
open bugs vs fixed ratio is unfortunately more or less constant.
The same with regressions. 67 in Writer? 177 in whole package? Regressions!
Bugs that irritate users most, because they want to use advertised nice new
features but they are stuck with old version for good. Does the project do
not respect users? One can see it that way... And all that with
double/triple code reviews. A joke!
Other problem is bugs backlog. >1000 of UNCONFIRMED or NEEDINFO, >2500 NEW
bugs! With a rate of ~6 bugs closed daily it is not very encouraging (please
remember that some of them are WORKSFORME, INVALID or DUPLICATE bugs). QA
should push red button instantly.
Luckily there are people who want to triage bugs (including myself). But
with those numbers it is a daunting task. Do not forget that after triage we
need a lot of people who want to fix them. 
And to get things worse we are talking here about bugs.freedesktop.org only!
There are other Bugzillas where LO bugs are reported (including AOO sister
code). Herculean effort is needed at once to get this straight.
As you can see there are major topics to discuss urgently. I hope together
we can change this situation.
And yes, bugs.freedesktop.org Product:LibreOffice is in a state of
bankruptcy... Numbers do not lie
(https://bugs.freedesktop.org/reports.cgi?product=LibreOffice&datasets=UNCONFIRMED&datasets=NEW&datasets=NEEDINFO).


Jochen wrote
> 
> 2) Whinging and grouching will not help
>> We need a strategy with a positive, encouraging motto for the developers.
> 
Well, somebody has to start it. I observe this project for few months and I
think, that QA voice is weak. I am perplexed reading "All good", "No
problems" in ESC QA section and then read regression or MAB stats. Also
while triaging bugs, see a few 123crash bugs a week or such "discoveries" as
bug 47466. I will whinge and grouch even more - LO is most crashy
application I ever touched in my life. This has to change. QA has to step
in. No more changing of splash screens (a lot of problems with that and
still bottom text is cutted) or rewriting filters just to introduce 12
regressions. It has to stop. Really. Now.
Crashkill, regressionkill, testing before commiting, better code reviews.
Insist that code rewrite planned for 4.0 is absurd, when there are dozens of
instant crashes in the codebase. Unfortunately devs do not like to fix bugs.
That is why I think a strategy should be to nominate bugs for every
maintenance release. 10 bugs per release? Ask the people - please, fix those
bugs first and then innovate. I can't see that on daily basis, only when
some disaster happens like recent regressions or problems with Windows
builds or a real real real hard blocker.

On the other way - paid support as a first answer for bug fixing is a
deadend. Corporate users can count their assets. They are tempted by "free"
software and they expect it just works (interoperates with their customers).
When they hear, that paid support is suggested, they start to count very
fast. What is better - pay every year 10/50/100$ per user for a support or
buy (or lease) other software and it just works with everyone/everything? Or
maybe they do not need a software at all with cloud computing here, there
and everywhere? It is very tricky situation for software in general...

That is all for today. Hope to see some ideas in ESC minutes some day and
more QA volunteers. 
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000474.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Fwd: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6 with a wealth of new features and improvements

[bfo]

Timur_LOL wrote
> 
> It is clear that at the beginning bugs list should contain only bugs
> which are *new* in LibreOffice 3.6, but at some time, while some fixes
> from MAB 3.5 are integrated in the code, there is a decision on what
> to do with the remaining unfixed bugs from a branch (3.5).
> 
Hi.
It is not a big surprise that 3.5MAB has already 3.4MAB bugs imported. Now,
most of them will become 3.6MAB, which is ridiculous. Personally I would
declare bankruptcy of this system. It is a road to nowhere. I'd propose
Nominate bug system. As branch will have 6 maintenance releases maybe a bug
should have Target version field, where QA would like to see a fix. I know
that LO development is Take your bug>Fix it>Commit system, but
Nominate>Take>Fix>Commit attitude would be a gain. What good are new
features, where people are stuck with 3.4.x version because of regressions
introduced in constant rewrite of filters without proper testing? Already
there are discussions about LO 4.0 with incompatible changes. With all due
respect this is insane. I would like to see 3.8 crashkill and 3.9
regressionkill versions before rewriting code in 4.0 (with strict unit tests
and regression testing policies). I know that developers do not like to fix
bugs (bring), but QA should encourage to fix old problems, even at the
cost of new features (new features are cool!!!).



> Most annoying bugs:
> - Report wizard "Finish" button does nothing
> - Exporting files with hyperlinks in footnotes/endnotes or even a table of
> content to DOCX was generating corrupted files that other office suites
> weren't able to open
> - Exporting (saving) spreadsheet file with cell comments to XLS/XLSX will
> lose comments
> 
Well, because of that (and 3.5MAB) 3.6  is a no go for many, in fact 3.5 in
no go for some already. Interesting read is an article about LO adoption in
France
(https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/mimo-working-group-french-ministries-certify-libreoffice-release-0)
where MIMO group recommends LibreOffice in 3.3.4 version until September
2012! I am curious which version will be recommended afterwards. They are
two branches behind already. Maybe their testing procedures would be good
test plans for LO testing in general? Does TDF cooperates with them about
it? Their deployment is mentioned in every marketing note recently...
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Fwd-tdf-announce-The-Document-Foundation-announces-LibreOffice-3-6-with-a-wealth-of-ns-tp4000177p4000297.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] minutes of ESC call ...

[bfo]

Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> 
> * QA update (Rainer)
>   + new bug report page - with search for duplicates thanks to Tollef
> 
Hi.
Nice that Potential Duplicates has been enabled, the same for usernames
autocomplete. Whining could be enabled also. Maybe bugs.freedesktop.org
administrators are going toward Bugzilla 4.2. Hope so...
Best regards.




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-minutes-of-ESC-call-tp3999026p3999075.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Freedesktop down ??

[bfo]

Florian Reisinger wrote
> 
> Somehow it seems to me that Bugzilla is down (With some circumstances 
> only...) http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/862641-81201261840PM
> 
Hi.
Seems it is updated to 4.0.7 now and blazing fast atm...
Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Freedesktop-down-tp3998811p3998817.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice code coverage

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

julien2412 wrote
> 
> There's a tracker about coverage, see
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38840
> For the moment, no one seemed to be on it (perhaps I'm wrong).
> 
Hi.
What a discovery! I have found some scripts already in the codebase
http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sal/qa/helper/gcov/. Maybe someone
with Linux build environment could check that out and try to generate some
stats. 
Best regards.



___
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-code-coverage-tp3994901p3998038.html

To unsubscribe from LibreOffice code coverage, visit 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=3994901&code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTQ5MDF8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Interoperability of LibreOffice and Microsoft Office 2013

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

Hi.
Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2013 Preview Evaluation is available for
download as MSI installer at 
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-US/evalcenter/hh973391.aspx?wt.mc_id=TEC_114_1_5
(link at the bottom of the page). Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows Server 2008
R2 or Windows Server 2012 required. Both 32bit and 64bit versions are
available. It is good opportunity to know what new features will be
available in this package and test interoperability with LibreOffice.
Product page is available at http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/en.
Best regards.






__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Interoperability-of-LibreOffice-and-Microsoft-Office-2013-tp3996056.html
This email was sent by bfo (via Nabble)
To receive all replies by email, subscribe to this discussion: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=subscribe_by_code&node=3996056&code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTYwNTZ8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] LibreOffice code coverage

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

Hi.
Today I stumbled upon Thunderbird code coverage report
(http://people.mozilla.org/~jcranmer2/c-ccov/).
Did anyone make such report for LibreOffice codebase? 
Best regards.



__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-code-coverage-tp3994901.html
This email was sent by bfo (via Nabble)
To receive all replies by email, subscribe to this discussion: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=subscribe_by_code&node=3994901&code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5OTQ5MDF8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Crash screencasts

[bfo]

Michael Stahl-2 wrote
> 
> i'd *love* to have something like this
> Mozilla crash database/web UI running for LO as well (the Sun Hamburg
> internal crash report web UI was a complete joke in comparison).
> [...]
> until that happens we'll have to make do with Linux distribution tools
> like ABRT which naturally don't work on upstream Mac/Windows builds.
> 
Hi.
Mozilla crash reporter is based on Breakpad which is Linux, Windows and Mac
compatible, so it could be possible to gather crash reports from all
platforms by one tool (if implemented in LO). 
Some resources:
http://code.google.com/p/google-breakpad/wiki/GettingStartedWithBreakpad
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Breakpad
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Socorro - Crash Stats
Best regards.


--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Crash-screencasts-tp3992249p3993926.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug transfer from AOOo Bugzilla to LibO Bugzilla

[bfo]

Hi.
In regards to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51352#c3
I think that imported bugs which are in RESOLVED FIXED state should get some
kind of notification by a triagger.
LO devs, with the current backlog, should not "waste" time for bugs, which
are already fixed in the other codebase.
According to
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Including-a-patch-from-AOO-tp3992463p3992646.html
such import will be possible in near future, so bugs indicated by such
notification could be proceed ASAP (possibly as EasyHack or Import Day).
Query based on See also field is no good, as there are many bugs reported
that are not fixed in AOO.
Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Bug-transfer-from-AOOo-Bugzilla-to-LibO-Bugzilla-tp3986722p3992866.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug transfer from AOOo Bugzilla to LibO Bugzilla

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> 
> Can anybody tell my, why query [1] only finds Bug 51147 and not also 
> most of
> Bug 50819 Bug 50190   Bug 50880   Bug 50488   Bug 50930   
> Bug 50974 
> Bug 50987 Bug 50994   Bug 51001   Bug 36991   Bug 51021   
> Bug 51072 
> Bug 51147 Bug 51232   Bug 51247   Bug 51253   Bug 51310   
> Bug 51329 
> Bug 51352 Bug 51396?
> 
Hi.
Those bugs have empty URL field. You should query for URL OR See also
fields.
Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Bug-transfer-from-AOOo-Bugzilla-to-LibO-Bugzilla-tp3986722p3992709.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Bug transfer from AOOo Bugzilla to LibO Bugzilla

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> 
> may be you find the time to check and transfer (if necessary) some bugs 
> from AOOo to LibO as I did with [1] to [2]? Some "promising" Bugs I 
> found with this [3] query. "[From Symphony]" can help to find more Bugs 
> also interesting for LibO.
> 
Hi.
Simple  Summary: [From Symphony] query returned 320 bugs found as of today.
Some of these could be reported for LO already. Considering the backlog in
LO UNCONFIRMED bugs, this would need a dedicated volunteer...  It should be
done anyway, as those bugs are getting fixes for AOOo already. Maybe
transfer fixed bugs first? Anyone interested?
Best regards.
P.S.
And where is "Patches transfer from AOOo codebase to LibO codebase" thread? 
Full story of [From Symphony] tag:
http://markmail.org/thread/5e337zqmkvmz5pdk

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Bug-transfer-from-AOOo-Bugzilla-to-LibO-Bugzilla-tp3986722p3992552.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Cobra - WinLDTP Automation

[bfo]

Michael Stahl-2 wrote
> 
>> Linux version is LDTP, Windows version is Cobra and Mac version is PyATOM
>> (Work in progress). 
> can all of these execute the same tests?
> surely writing tests 3 times is not the way to go.
> 
"With LDTP and WinLDTP, the script API part will be the same. The only
places where the script writer has to update things would be like - when the
widget types between both the platforms are different or the UI object label
is different"
More informations:
news article -
http://news.efytimes.com/e1/82073/VMWare-Open-Sources--Windows-Version-Of-Linux-Desktop-Testing-Project
developer's blog - http://nagappanal.blogspot.com/



> i wonder what AOO uses for UI testing; perhaps IBM has some internal
> thing for that.
> 
I have found the following resources:
https://cwiki.apache.org/OOOUSERS/release-qa-plan.html
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
http://www.mail-archive.com/ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg20994.html



> the smoketest (as well as many other automated tests) can be run during
> the build simply by calling "make check", and i would hope that our
> release builds are built that way.
> 
Are results of such tests available anywhere?



>> - full regression test has to be done before every major release
>> - basic regression test should be done also before every bug fix release 
>> What is the status of those? Are they executed before each release? Any
>> dashboards available?
> i wonder what "regression test" means here? manual tests, or does it
> refer to testtool?
> 
I got it from this article:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Regression_Tests


--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246p3992538.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Crash screencasts

[bfo]

Hi.
Very interesting screencasts available at air mozilla:
The Life Cycle of a Firefox Crash https://air.mozilla.org/crash-life-cycl/
Mozilla CrashKill Investigation and Analysis
https://air.mozilla.org/crashkill/
Hope LibreOffice own crash reporter will be enabled soon...
Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Crash-screencasts-tp3992249.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

[Libreoffice-qa] Cobra - WinLDTP Automation

[bfo]

Hi.
 I stumbled upon Cobra – WinLDTP,  Windows version of Linux Desktop Testing
Project open sourced by VMWare
recently. Using this tool, the GUI functionality of an application can be
tested in Windows XP SP3, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8 development release.
Libre/OpenOffice is mentioned. Did anybody used LDTP in the past to perform
functional, regression testing? More info at
http://ldtp.freedesktop.org/wiki.
Best regards.
P.S.
There are traces of automation at wiki.documentfoundation.org:
- smoketest has to be done before any beta or rc build is announced
- full regression test has to be done before every major release
- basic regression test should be done also before every bug fix release 
What is the status of those? Are they executed before each release? Any
dashboards available?



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cobra-WinLDTP-Automation-tp3992246.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Cleaning bug list

[bfo [via Document Foundation Mail Archive]]

, when you have to
follow many bugtrackers.



> The ideal process is described at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Initial_state
> Of course, developers are just humans, sometimes quite overloaded and
> they do not follow the process. [...]
> developers to close bugs by asking about the state. I wonder, how often
> do you see such a bug with commits that is not closed?
> 
Disagree. It is a page for bug reporters. I really like the gerrit migration
and would like to see it integrated with Bugzilla. Also always precommit
hooks can be implemented if developers tend to forget to put a bug number
into a commit message. I already stumbled upon UNCONFIRMED bugs which have
been fixed already and suddenly changed into RESOLVED FIXED. I would like to
know what is going on with the bugs at any moment.



> Well, we do not want to create bug report for each fix. It is too
> complex process with poor results. If a developer is talkative, she
> provides a good commit message. If she is not talkative, she would
> create useless bug report. We could motivate them by asking for details,
> saying thanks for info, ...
> Anyway, I think that it is not important now. We do not have enough
> people who could test all commits, so we do not need perfect commit
> messages.
> 
It is very unfortunate and doesn't help triaging bugs. Another resource to
watch by QA member - the commits.
I really like Bugzilla developers strict workflow. Every commit with bug
number, patch reviewed by a specialist (not just +1 to get it as soon as
possible), bug assigned and status changed upon commit. It can be done
automatically.



> We currently do not have enough people doing bug triage. If we have, we
> could start thinking about specializing. 
> 
I thought people mentioned in
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FindTheExpert would be interested what is
going on in their component?



> I do not think that bugzilla is a good tool for handling these type of
> tasks ;-)
> 
Disagree. I really like how Mozilla use Bugzilla (it's their tool, you
know). Every Action Item, problem, request etc. is in the bugtracker.
Everything. Since few weeks I try to know how LibreOffice project works and
I have big trouble with it. So many mailinglists, posts, wiki articles to
browse.   



>> Do you VERIFY bugs? I see just 62 bugs as VERIFIED FIXED. I do not see
>> such
>> section in Getting Involved. Surely there are users willing to
>> participate
>> this way.
> We do not have enough people to sort new bugs, so nobody took care of
> this :-)
> Would you like to create a wiki page describing the process? 
> 
Why o why I expected such question  :)



> What do you mean by the flag?
> MAB just works. [..]
> Alternatively, you just look at the query
> and you see list of still opened bugs.
> Note that the queries are available at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria#Blocker_Bug_Nomination
> 
I can't describe it better than Bugzilla main developer, who offered help in
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33070.
Also https://bugs.freedesktop.org/docs/en/html/flags-overview.html is a good
read.
I really like how Mozilla projects are using flags to nominate blockers and
all other requests.
I can't imagine manageable and organized QA process without them. Please
consider...



>> Well, sorry for such a pack of off-topic questions, but I'd like to
>> understand QA in this project better.
> It is fine. I hope that I did not discourage you. I feel that you want
> to have everything perfect which is great. On the other hand, we have
> only limited resources, we are just humans, and we need to optimize the
> processes for this. The target is clear. We all want to improve LO with
> each release and have the best office suite ever :-)
> Thanks for all your contributions.
> 
Not at all. As I am getting into this more and more the time has come to ask
- where I should sign to become QA member (level 1 :))?



> PS: If you reply, please try to configure your mail client, so it puts
> some prefix "> " before the old text and put your answer inline. 
> 
I am sorry if I produce garbage, but due to various reasons I am using
nabble interface only...

Best regards.


__
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cleaning-bug-list-tp3988836p3991648.html
This email was sent by bfo (via Nabble)
To receive all replies by email, subscribe to this discussion: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=subscribe_by_code&node=3988836&code=bGlicmVvZmZpY2UtcWFAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnfDM5ODg4MzZ8LTE0NjUxOTE3MDY=___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]

[bfo]

Bjoern Michaelsen wrote
> 
> Crash counter (search for libreoffice-core):
>  https://errors.ubuntu.com/
> Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by most affected users:
> Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by bug heat:
> 

This s very cool. Question - why I have mostly "page not find" errors when I
click in the Bugs report column
for libreoffice-core?

Best regards.

--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-crasher-bugs-and-most-annoying-bugs-generated-by-automation-was-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug--tp3987469p3988080.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] How to improve our Bug tracking system

[bfo]

Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote
> 
> I now want to start to collect ideas how we can make a big step 
> improving our (Bugzilla) Bug tracking system. The goal is that after we 
> will have finished work (end 2012?) 
> 
Hi.
You should check bugzilla.mozilla.org. They have implemented a lot of
extensions and customizations to the bugzilla codebase. And of course all
this is availabe at http://bzr.mozilla.org/bmo/.


> we will have a system what will work without bigger changes at least for
> the next 5 years for our growing 
> contributors community.
> 
That seems to be impossible as Bugzilla has more or less 6 months release
cycle and branches older than 18 months are eoled. This way its developers
are constantly adding new features, sometimes with fundamental changes (just
as new default workflow). You never know what you can get in 2017 :).
Some day also important change like bug sightings feature is planned:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55970. 
I think you should start with Bugzilla update to most recent version. Then
take a look at other extensions https://github.com/bayoteers (oh, you did
that already).



> As a tool for that I created
> , I hope
> that we so can get an overview
> what our needs are and how we can reach the goals. 
> 

I'll comment on that here:

OpenID - you can check this extension
https://github.com/jalcine/bugzilla-openid
Direct Data Base Access - you can be interested in BzAPI
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:REST_API or Bugzilla webservices
http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.2/en/html/api/Bugzilla/WebService.html
Hide obsolete Version numbers for new Reports - check
http://www.bugzilla.org/releases/4.2/release-notes.html#v42_feat_product
Installation of Bugzilla Addons or Extensions - bugzilla.gnome.org code is
here
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~bgo-maintainers/bugzilla.gnome.org/3.4/files
Duplicates table or Automatic Duplicate Bug Detection are build in features
Bugzilla Database Contents - you can use build in OldBugMove extension

Also you can consider enabling Voting feature, to vote for bugs and
therefore autoconfirm them.

And one thing about Bugzilla UI - it will change sooner or later into this: 
http://bugzillaupdate.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/jwilde-bugzillapretty-bug-27-2-2011.png.

Best regards.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-How-to-improve-our-Bug-tracking-system-tp3985393p3986077.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
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/