[Libreoffice-qa] [proposal] [QA-WE Essen 2012] Bug submission API - How to improve the current system

[Florian Reisinger]

Hi Nino, all!

Am 03.10.2012 21:19, schrieb Nino Novak:
> Hi Florian,
>
> Am 03.10.2012 18:43 schrieb Florian Reisinger:
>
>> During the German QA meeting some ideas developed.
> thanks for reporting.
>
>   To cut it short, we came to
>> the conclusion, that a Bug Submission API (BS-API) would be very helpful.
> Could you elaborate a little the "why?"?
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsed&list_id=139288&o1=greaterthan&query_based_on=DELETE%20NEEDINFO%20bugs&chfieldto=-6m&query_format=advanced&chfield=bug_status&chfieldfrom=2000-01-01&chfieldvalue=NEEDINFO&bug_status=NEEDINFO&v1=17&product=LibreOffice&known_name=DELETE%20NEEDINFO%20bugs

80 bugs since 22 - 08 !! which are in NEEDINFO for more than 6 months. I 
closed ~800 bugs. Because of some false positives I added the rule "no 
change within 17 days" It is frustrating, when you try to reproduce a 
bug and fail to do so and don't get further info. The end user should 
not get in touch with bugilla at all. It is also very important that 
more people try to check the bugs (which is in some ways done @ the 
users at de.libreoffice ML.

Or take this query:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsed&list_id=139330&o1=greaterthaneq&query_format=advanced&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&v1=150&product=LibreOffice

126 unconfirmed bugs, not touched within 150 days. All in all there are 
1798 bugs (

  * UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED, NEEDINFO) with no action in
    the last 150 days
  *   )

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&f1=days_elapsed&list_id=139332&o1=greaterthaneq&product=LibreOffice&query_format=advanced&v1=150&order=changeddate%2Cpriority%2Cbug_severity&limit=0

By the way: 150 bugs are assigned to a dev with no change in the last 
150 days
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?f1=days_elapsed&list_id=139333&o1=greaterthaneq&query_format=advanced&bug_status=ASSIGNED&v1=150&product=LibreOffice


Sorry, if the "why is not explained to you properly... There is a lot of 
information in the queries and I don't have time now to continue 
writing. Sorry


>
> We have >10 years of OOo/LO without such API, so why do you think it would be
> very helpful right now? IOW, which *current* problem is supposed to be solved by
> this API?
See above

>
> IIRC, the current bottle neck in QA is triaging and early testing, so don't you
> think we should better concentrate forces on triaging+testing and not split efforts?
>
> However, I don't want to discourage the initiative. If there is a substantial
> drive towards developing the API now, do it. But if it takes ressources from
> dev/QA people and distracts them from doing their regular tasks, then please
> wait two or three months until unconfirmed bug queue approaches Zero and a
> performant early testing workflow has been established ;-)
>
>
> and /ad rem/ :
>
> (Apart from the skepticism above, I'm very much in favour of making bug
> reporting easy, of course.)
>
> I made
>> a graphic (http://goo.gl/dHWhu)
> (Nice workflow, no objections at first glance.)
Thanks

>
> Nino
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
> Mail address: Libreoffice-qa at 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/
Yours

Florian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/attachments/20121004/b6058a63/attachment.html>