Hi there,
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 04:57 -0700, bfo 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
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
Hi there,
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 09:38 -0700, bfo wrote:
Unfortunately those graphs are discouraging in many ways. Especially if one
thinks about upgrading LO...
Sure - of course I want to get on people's case ;-) we don't show any
visibility of the overall number of non-regression bugs
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 19:33 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
I can assure you they are. The best way to get a bug solved is:
...
Once you are there, it is orders of magnitude easier to go ahead with the bug.
Sure - the problem is then for developers to sift out these bugs where
a ton of
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
Hi,
Two points to this:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 09:57:56AM -0700, bfo 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,
Hi Timur,
On Fri, 2012-08-10 at 12:16 +0200, Timur Gadzo wrote:
I'm asking for EXPLANATION in the first post when will FIXES for bugs
resolved in MAB 3.5 be included in LO 3.6 CODE.
Ah ! sorry, I mis-understood :-) so the generic answer to:
when will XYZ bug be fixed ?
Hi Michael, all,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:36:27AM +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
On Fri, 2012-08-10 at 12:16 +0200, Timur Gadzo wrote:
I'm asking for EXPLANATION in the first post when will FIXES for bugs
resolved in MAB 3.5 be included in LO 3.6 CODE.
Ah ! sorry, I mis-understood
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
Hi bfo
bfo wrote
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.
As an ex-QA member, I think I should warn you that LO is not
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:38:21AM -0700, bfo wrote:
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.
Hi Pedro,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:54:15AM -0700, Pedro wrote:
As an ex-QA member, ...
Apparently this (time based release) development model works for other OSS,
but I believe that is because they must have a much larger QA community...
Lets please discuss that constructively: Yes, we need
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
Hi *,
Am 10.08.2012 08:27, schrieb Rainer Bielefeld:
bfo schrieb:
Personally I would declare bankruptcy of this system.
IMHO has bfo some right. But:
1) bankruptcy of this system is a little bit exaggerated.
2) Whinging and grouching will not help
We need a strategy with a positive,
On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 15:27 +0200, Timur Gadzo wrote:
I find that there should be an explanation in MAB 3.6. when exactly
will fixes for bugs resolved in LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs
be included in LO 3.6.
Right; that's not clear. Personally I prefer a rather shorter, more
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
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
Hi bfo,
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 08:42:56AM -0700, bfo 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
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
Hello
I find that there should be an explanation in MAB 3.6. when exactly
will fixes for bugs resolved in LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs
be included in LO 3.6.
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
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.
21 matches
Mail list logo
