[Libreoffice-qa] Closing bugs in bugzilla: fixed in master or fixed everywhere?

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Wed Sep 5 12:24:41 PDT 2012

On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 06:30:30PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> We can change our opinion on these questions, and then the "intended
> branches" set changes.

Yes, but everytime we change our opinion on this, possibly the bug state would
need to change, which is why Im not too happy with this.

> So if you go to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 (LO
> 3.5 MAB), you have to click through on *each* resolved bug to read the
> bug log and try to see if there is a "fixed in 3.5.x" comment (or
> possibly look in whiteboard for a target:3.5", so that you can
> evaluate whether it is still relevant, or if action is needed?
> This makes it IMHO too easy for a bug to "slip under the radar" and be
> forgotten.

Why not just query for target 3.5.x in whiteboard?

> In the ESC call agenda, we have MAB statistics that say e.g.
>  * 3.5 most annoying bugs ...
>      + 81 open (of 269) older 73/258 73/257 76/256 75/253 77/253 73/250  72/249
>         30%                 26%    28%    30%     30%    30%    29%	  29%
>      + https://bugs.freedesktop.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=37361&hide_resolved=1

While this is also queryable, Im not too happy with the MAB concept in the long
run anyway -- Petr suggested we should try to move to getting the bug
priorities right if we get the manpower for it in QA. That should be a lot
better to query in the end.

> We could consider automoving on RC release rather than final release?

I personally would stick with finals, RCs are prereleases just like daily builds.



More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list