[Libreoffice-qa] Bug Fixed in 4.2 branch, broken in 4.1 daily, status thoughts?
pedlino at gmail.com
Fri Jun 14 15:40:29 PDT 2013
> This is a general problem that I think we shoudl just talk a bit about. If
> we confirm a bug on 4.1 but it's fixed in 4.2 master - what status is
> appropriate? Usually WFM is good but it's hard to tell a user "so it'll be
> broken for the foreseeable future but by 4.2 release you'll be good to go"
> The bug in question isn't major at all (fdo#65550) but looking for
IMO the triager should ask the dev who submitted the patch if he can be
back-port and cherry pick the patch to the branch that is going to be
released sooner (especially if it is a regression).
If you don't know who fixed it, then maybe ask the ESC...
If it can't be backported, close the bug as FIXED RESOLVED with a final
comment like "Fixed in Branch 4.2"
I assume that WFM means Works for me (you do have the bad habit of using
acronyms ;) ).
I disagree on using Works for me. As a Bug submitter that is the WORST
answer I can get. It means in plain language "That's your problem because
it's working fine on my end"
In the particular case of this bug that will only be fixed in 4.2 (i.e. 6
months from now) if this was a critical problem for the user it would mean
he would give up on LO (maybe return after 6 months... probably not...).
So I really think that Devs need to make an effort to submit bug fixes to
master and simultaneously cherry pick to the soonest to be released branch.
Just my 2 cents ;)
View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Bug-Fixed-in-4-2-branch-broken-in-4-1-daily-status-thoughts-tp4061558p4061562.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Libreoffice-qa