[Libreoffice-qa] PENDING ITEM: Updates to the BSA

Robinson Tryon bishop.robinson at gmail.com
Sat Nov 2 08:05:58 PDT 2013

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:28 AM, libreoffice-ertai.nl
<libreoffice at ertai.nl> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I think we should just collapse to a 3.x series and have that tell you that
> it is too old.

That sounds fine for 3.x builds. Per the ReleasePlan page, 4.0 will
reach EOL before the end of this month, so we should have a solution
that can include those builds as well.

> But what I also noticed was that we are asing for:
> - Version the bug appeared
> - Latest known-working version
> It seems to me that the 1st one is always the 2nd version + 1. If somebody
> looks at it.

Sure, that's the ideal state it should be in after triage and
bibisecting*, but I think that most users won't fill in the
Latest-known-working-version field, and for those who do, there may be
a gap of 2 or more versions, depending upon when they upgraded

> Shouldn't one of those be the version people are working in, as that needs
> to be checked by BSA to see if it needs to give this warning.

Personally, I'd be fine if someone said "I see this bug in 4.x but I
remember that it worked in 3.3". Are we going to have to test to
confirm that? Sure. Do we have to do a bit of sleuthing to track down
when the bug was introduced? Sure. But this additional information
gives us at least a hint that this is a regression, which is useful.

So Version-bug-appeared should be pre-EOL, but
Latest-known-working-version can be EOL.


* technically speaking, bibisecting will let us drill-down more
precisely than just our released builds, but we all get the general

More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list