[Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013
jmadero.dev at gmail.com
Mon Jan 21 09:25:23 PST 2013
On 01/21/2013 07:08 AM, Eike Rathke wrote:
> On Thursday, 2013-01-17 09:43:33 -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
>> -*Agreed: *NEEDINFO: Used only if most the information is there and
>> the bug can be confirmed but additional information would be useful
>> Request that once information is provided, move bug to NEW not to
>> UNCONFIRMED or REOPENED
> This to me is not what NEEDINFO is for, I do need more info on a bug
> that I can't reproduce and hence is unconfirmed. I may also NEEDINFO for
> additional information, but this IMHO is not the primary use case.
>> -*Agreed: *INVALID: If bug cannot be confirmed with information and
>> there just isn't enough information there to reproduce the bug, we
>> will move to INVALID
> There should be NEEDINFO before that. Closing such bugs as INVALID would
> frustrate reporters that in fact did not submit an invalid report but an
> insufficiently described one. Here NEEDINFO would be the polite way to
> say INSUFFICIENT.
We are having a second conversation about this issue this week as we
agree that the workflow doesn't work. The issue is that FDO limits your
ability to go back to UNCONFIRMED which is a problem. If you mark a bug
as WFM, you are unable to go directly back to UNCONFIRMED - which for me
is strange, I understand if it's marked as FIXED but WFM shouldn't block
you from doing UNCONFIRMED again.
Might need to get Tollef involved as well.
More information about the Libreoffice-qa