[Libreoffice-qa] Proposed mass bug change

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Florian Reisinger Florian Reisinger
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Libreoffice-qa] Proposed mass bug change

Hi,

For statistic purpose it would be nice to clean out all RESOLVED bugs (
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?order=Importance&list_id=389594&chfieldto=Now&chfield=bug_status&query_format=advanced&chfieldfrom=-12m&chfieldvalue=RESOLVED&bug_status=RESOLVED&product=LibreOffice 
), currently 6741 [which is a good number] to their CLOSED state ( e.g
RESOLVED -> NOTABUG to CLOSED -> NOTABUG). The total number of closed
bugs would jump from ~1100 to ~8000 and the resolved from ~14500 to 8000.

Why this is important? RESOLVED can and should be changed back (RESOLVED
-> WFM 1 person says it works for him). Closed is something like "buried
in the grave of bugzilla".

I hope you agree, that "RESOLVED" is somewhat temporary and "CLOSED" as
the final step....

PS: Sorry for being little active..... Background work for the Bisect
GUI is all I can do now :(

--
Liebe Grüße | Yours,
Florian Reisinger


_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/
jmadero jmadero
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposed mass bug change

On 02/01/2014 11:46 PM, Florian Reisinger wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For statistic purpose it would be nice to clean out all RESOLVED bugs
> (
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?order=Importance&list_id=389594&chfieldto=Now&chfield=bug_status&query_format=advanced&chfieldfrom=-12m&chfieldvalue=RESOLVED&bug_status=RESOLVED&product=LibreOffice
> ), currently 6741 [which is a good number] to their CLOSED state ( e.g
> RESOLVED -> NOTABUG to CLOSED -> NOTABUG). The total number of closed
> bugs would jump from ~1100 to ~8000 and the resolved from ~14500 to 8000.
>
> Why this is important? RESOLVED can and should be changed back
> (RESOLVED -> WFM 1 person says it works for him). Closed is something
> like "buried in the grave of bugzilla".
I can see the point of this but my suggestion is we wait until we get
our own bug tracker and can prevent the spam that will go out. Also
maybe make it so we only close a bug completely once it's been RESOLVED
- SOMETHING for at least 6 months or something - that gives time for
someone to actually change it back if they want to.

Thoughts?

Best,
Joel

P.S. Hope all is going well outside of the project :) We do miss having
you in the chat more often
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/
Jean-Baptiste Faure Jean-Baptiste Faure
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposed mass bug change

Le 02/02/2014 09:06, Joel Madero a écrit :
[...]
> I can see the point of this but my suggestion is we wait until we get
> our own bug tracker and can prevent the spam that will go out. Also
> maybe make it so we only close a bug completely once it's been RESOLVED
> - SOMETHING for at least 6 months or something - that gives time for
> someone to actually change it back if they want to.
>
> Thoughts?

I think QA team should use VERIFIED / FIXED to confirm that a bug is
fixed because RESOLVED / FIXED is often set automatically.

And bugs in verified / fixed state could be closed automatically after
some time (2 months for example) without change.

Best regards. JBF

--
Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/
Tommy Tommy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposed mass bug change

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 11:08:08 +0100, Jean-Baptiste Faure  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 02/02/2014 09:06, Joel Madero a écrit :
> [...]
>> I can see the point of this but my suggestion is we wait until we get
>> our own bug tracker and can prevent the spam that will go out. Also
>> maybe make it so we only close a bug completely once it's been RESOLVED
>> - SOMETHING for at least 6 months or something - that gives time for
>> someone to actually change it back if they want to.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I think QA team should use VERIFIED / FIXED to confirm that a bug is
> fixed because RESOLVED / FIXED is often set automatically.
>
> And bugs in verified / fixed state could be closed automatically after
> some time (2 months for example) without change.
>
> Best regards. JBF
>


nice proposal, I like it.

_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/
jmadero jmadero
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposed mass bug change

On 02/02/2014 12:27 PM, Tommy wrote:

> On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 11:08:08 +0100, Jean-Baptiste Faure
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Le 02/02/2014 09:06, Joel Madero a écrit :
>> [...]
>>> I can see the point of this but my suggestion is we wait until we get
>>> our own bug tracker and can prevent the spam that will go out. Also
>>> maybe make it so we only close a bug completely once it's been RESOLVED
>>> - SOMETHING for at least 6 months or something - that gives time for
>>> someone to actually change it back if they want to.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I think QA team should use VERIFIED / FIXED to confirm that a bug is
>> fixed because RESOLVED / FIXED is often set automatically.
>>
>> And bugs in verified / fixed state could be closed automatically after
>> some time (2 months for example) without change.
>>
I agree that ideally we would go from RESOLVED - FIXED --> VERIFIED
FIXED -> CLOSED but our team I don't think is quite big enough yet to
accomplish this. My suggestion is we hold off until we have our own bug
tracker and continue to encourage more people to join QA - as it grows
we can tackle these large double checks and closes.

Thoughts?
Joel
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/
Robinson Tryon Robinson Tryon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proposed mass bug change

On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 9:40 PM, Joel Madero <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I agree that ideally we would go from RESOLVED - FIXED --> VERIFIED
> FIXED -> CLOSED but our team I don't think is quite big enough yet to
> accomplish this.
>...
> Thoughts?

For now, I generally reserve 'VERIFIED FIXED' as something that OP may
set. Given the differences in hardware, OS, and other software (and
the inevitable interactions between them), I'm reticent to 'verify' a
fix unless I'm either the bug reporter or I'm in close contact with
him and have gotten word that he is satisfied with the
patch/resolution.

But I'm quite open to changes in how we use these terms :-)

> My suggestion is we hold off until we have our own bug
> tracker and continue to encourage more people to join QA - as it grows
> we can tackle these large double checks and closes.
>

+1

For now, there are indeed bigger fish that need our attention.

Cheers,
--R
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [hidden email]
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/