Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Whiteboard Status'
Hi! Having saved queries against crash/dataloss/perf etc. items gives bugs on your radar without the need of checking Major/Critical, Summary or comments. It is easier to be alarmed and IMHO such Whiteboard items could be used more. Also you can chart them against time in series. Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Whiteboard-Status-tp4112588p4112591.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] Whiteboard Status'
> Hi! > Having saved queries against crash/dataloss/perf etc. items gives bugs on > your radar without the need of checking Major/Critical, Summary or comments. > It is easier to be alarmed and IMHO such Whiteboard items could be used > more. Then my follow up question to dataloss is what do we want to consider "dataloss" - is formatting loss sufficient? Let's say "justified center" is lost - is that data loss? Or what about if conditional formatting is lost? Thanks for the feedback bfoman - always appreciated. Best, Joel ___ 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] Whiteboard Status'
Hi, a few comments: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 02:39:36PM -0700, Joel Madero wrote: > complextest Is this useful? If so -- when should we use it? > unoapitestWe have "uno" is that sufficient? These are used when a complex test (like in sw/qa/complex/writer/) fails and was temporary disabled and thus need investigation/fixing. unoapitest are the same for the tests from qadevOOo. > UIWe have "SkillUI" any reason to have it as a topic also? > TopicDebugWe have "SkillDebug" any reason to have it as a topic also? > TopicInfraWe have "SkillInfra" any reason to have it as a topic also? > TopicWeb Component WWW? Redmine? We should keep those at least as long as we query them from the EasyHacks wiki pages. > odf Suggestion to change to "extension:ODF" -- see previous email A prefix might make sense. "extension" is unfortunate though, better: filter:odf or format:odf. > hfmuc2012 No clue what this is > lhm-limux No clue what this is Seems Munich deployment related. We shouldnt mess with those unless they cause trouble. Best, Bjoern ___ 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] Whiteboard Status'
On 16/06/14 23:39, Joel Madero wrote: > > *Status* *Question* > complextest Is this useful? If so – when should we use it? > unoapitestWe have “uno” is that sufficient? these two are very similar, maybe we could combine them as junittest? > dataloss For me priority means this – Major/Critical plus a useful > comment. Is someone tracking these to the point that we should start > encouraging this status more? yes this would actually be quite useful, it is very hard to tell from bug subjects if there is a data-loss issue there, so you can't search for it currently. although actually i'd like to limit "dataloss" to ODF documents only, where this really is not supposed to happen - if it's some other format it's more like a missing feature . > experimentalEnabled Is this useful? a little... it lets us de-prioritize bugs that happen in features that are known to be broken anyway. > odf Suggestion to change to “extension:ODF” – see previous email this has nothing to do with extensions, but with file formats; in particular ODF which is the default format and the one where we have to care the most about interoperability issues with other office suites (and also older versions of LO), so a short and sweet keyword is really needed. > odf_validationWho uses this? How do we know it's “validation” is it > for developers only? people have filed bugs about LO producing ODF documents that ODF validators find objectionable. i've got questions too: > ConfirmedRegression > > Description: Is used if a bug is confirmed to be a regression. why do we need this, given that we have a "regression" keyword? this is a pointless alias... developers don't search for it, the ESC bug-stats script doesn't know about it... fortunately currently only 2 bugs have it. ___ 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] Whiteboard Status'
On 06/17/2014 02:46 AM, Michael Stahl wrote: > On 16/06/14 23:39, Joel Madero wrote: >> *Status* *Question* >> complextest Is this useful? If so – when should we use it? >> unoapitest We have “uno” is that sufficient? > these two are very similar, maybe we could combine them as junittest? Hm - Bjoern seemed to like them separate. For now we'll keep separate but I'll make a note of maybe combining. > > although actually i'd like to limit "dataloss" to ODF documents only, > where this really is not supposed to happen - if it's some other format > it's more like a missing feature We'll discuss on call tomorrow. > . >> experimentalEnabled Is this useful? > a little... it lets us de-prioritize bugs that happen in features that > are known to be broken anyway. +1 > >> odf Suggestion to change to “extension:ODF” – see previous email > this has nothing to do with extensions, but with file formats; in > particular ODF which is the default format and the one where we have to > care the most about interoperability issues with other office suites > (and also older versions of LO), so a short and sweet keyword is really > needed. Yes I said the wrong word - maybe filter:ODT, filter:DOCX, filter:RTF is best. >> odf_validation Who uses this? How do we know it's “validation” is it >> for developers only? > people have filed bugs about LO producing ODF documents that ODF > validators find objectionable. +1 > > i've got questions too: > >> ConfirmedRegression >> >> Description: Is used if a bug is confirmed to be a regression. > why do we need this, given that we have a "regression" keyword? this is > a pointless alias... developers don't search for it, the ESC bug-stats > script doesn't know about it... fortunately currently only 2 bugs have it. Moving to not in use - agreed regression keyword is sufficient. Best, Joel ___ 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] Whiteboard Status'
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Joel Madero wrote: > >>> ConfirmedRegression >>> >>> Description: Is used if a bug is confirmed to be a regression. >> why do we need this, given that we have a "regression" keyword? this is >> a pointless alias... developers don't search for it, the ESC bug-stats >> script doesn't know about it... fortunately currently only 2 bugs have it. > Moving to not in use - agreed regression keyword is sufficient. AFAIK the only reason we use 'regression' in the keyword field instead of the whiteboard is that FDO happens to have 'regression' set as a keyword. To simplify our learning curve for QA, we should make a push for consistency. (we can make a decision here after bugzilla migration) --R -- Robinson Tryon LibreOffice Community Outreach Herald Senior QA Bug Wrangler The Document Foundation qu...@libreoffice.org ___ 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] Whiteboard Status'
On 18/06/14 17:39, Robinson Tryon wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Joel Madero wrote: >> ConfirmedRegression Description: Is used if a bug is confirmed to be a regression. >>> why do we need this, given that we have a "regression" keyword? this is >>> a pointless alias... developers don't search for it, the ESC bug-stats >>> script doesn't know about it... fortunately currently only 2 bugs have it. >> Moving to not in use - agreed regression keyword is sufficient. > > AFAIK the only reason we use 'regression' in the keyword field instead > of the whiteboard is that FDO happens to have 'regression' set as a > keyword. To simplify our learning curve for QA, we should make a push > for consistency. (we can make a decision here after bugzilla > migration) exactly, if we can finally add the keywords that we need then we can get rid of a lot of whiteboard entries and have bugzilla detect typos entered in the keywords field... ___ 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/
