[Libreoffice-qa] Bibisect Whiteboard Status

Joel Madero jmadero.dev at gmail.com
Mon Jun 10 09:49:01 PDT 2013

Hey Terrence,

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Terrence Enger <tenger at iseries-guru.com>wrote:

> On Sat, 2013-05-25 at 10:44 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
> > I finally got around to updating the wiki:
> >
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Fields/Whiteboard#Bibisect
> >
> > Let's not use all the other options now and stick with:
> >
> > bibisected
> > PreBibisect
> > bibisectrequest
> So, considering the possibility of updating wiki page HowToBibisect in
> line with the reduction in the number of whiteboard values, I wonder:
> (*) The explanation of whiteboard status PreBibisect says
>         Only use this f you are using the daily bibisect package or
>         the bibisect40 package, as the tagged version does not go back
>         as far.
>     I suggest
>         Only use this if you are using the 4.0 bibisect package or the
>         3.5 bibisect package, as the tagged versions in the other
>         bibisect packages do not go back as far.

+1, sounds fine, although no one should be using 3.5 bibisect package any
longer. The bibiect40 package contains everything in 3.5 so using 3.5 is
outdated. I believe the wiki says something along these lines :)

>     If the suggestion is not right, then my understanding of the
>     bibisect packages is in urgent need of correction.  Help!

Hm looks like you get it :)

> (*) Should existing whiteboard words "bibisect40bugs",
>     "bibisect36bugs", and "bibisect35bugs" be changed to
>     "bibisectrequest"?  Is it worth the flurry of emails and updated
>     date-last-changed fields?  Only for open bugs, perhaps?

No, these mean that bibisect was done, not that it's requested. So the more
appropriate would be "bibisected" but I don't think we should do this, at
least not yet, with the NEEDINFO project going we're already sending a lot
of spam to developers and users from FDO - sending even more seems like a
bad idea atm. In the future this could be useful. Can you quickly get a
query together that shows us approx. how many bugs we're talking about - I
think focusing on non closed bugs would be ideal, why update whiteboard
status on bugs that have been fixed?


*Joel Madero*
LibreOffice QA Volunteer
jmadero.dev at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/attachments/20130610/136ab43f/attachment.html>

More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list