[Libreoffice-qa] Stagnant NEEDINFO bugs

[Petr Mladek]

Alex Thurgood píše v St 06. 02. 2013 v 14:09 +0100:
> Le 06/02/2013 13:19, Michael Stahl a écrit :
> 
> 
> >
> > how many of your bugs are in NEEDINFO state?  if the problem is really
> > developer attention (and i don't doubt that this is the case for many
> > bugs) then they should not be in NEEDINFO state and you won't get any mails.
> 
> 
> I was commenting more from the perspective of someone who went through
> the rigmarole of having many of his bug reports reclassified and the
> demoralising effect that can have on a contributor. Personally, I have
> learned to live with it, but that doesn't mean that I think it is a good
> idea generally.
> 
> 
> As for my own reports, I understand that developers may not have the
> time or resources to commit to looking at any given report, but as you
> say, these are probably mostly not in the NEEDINFO status anyway. Some
> of the reports which I have filed, confirmed or added myself to, and
> which are currently in NEEDINFO status (mostly database or printing
> issues) are due mainly to being unable to test the alleged buggy
> behaviour on Mac OSX, either because I don't have the corresponding
> equipment to test with (e.g Brother printers) or OSX's system security
> privileges preventing me from setting up db servers to test on, whereas
> these used to work in previous versions of OSX. These particular
> problems are independent of LO, but that does not mean that the LO bugs
> per se are invalid (since, at the time the report was filed, the problem
> did occur).

I am confused. Are these bugs in NEEDINFO just because nobody found time
to confirm them? If this is true, they should be in the state
UNCONFIRMED.

The bugs should be in the state NEEDINFO only when they can't be
reproduced because an information is missing.

Could you please give an example of such bugs?

Best Regards,
Petr