-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You know, it's mails like this that make me really feel that it's not
worth triaging bugs, or aiming for a reasonably decent QA.
It's when you start dealing with ~1000 bugs over a few source packages
that this kind of stuff gets interesting. Yes,
Sarah Hobbs wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You know, it's mails like this that make me really feel that it's not
worth triaging bugs, or aiming for a reasonably decent QA.
It's when you start dealing with ~1000 bugs over a few source packages
that this kind of stuff
[Minimally-knowledgeable user interjecting here:]
Would it help if “possibly complete” bugs were (somehow) easily
distinguishable from other Incomplete bugs? By “possibly complete” I
mean a bug that is marked as Incomplete, but that has had “some”
activity since being marked Incomplete. “Some”
On 22/09/2007 Scott Kitterman wrote:
60 days is to short. Even if we set a time, there are classes of bugs (such
as crashes) that even if incomplete are not invalid (a crash bug is always a
bug). I don't think bugs should get marked invalid except manually.
Also, how do we deal with the
