[Libreoffice-qa] Where should users report bugs?

Robinson Tryon bishop.robinson at gmail.com
Wed Nov 6 12:39:07 PST 2013

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:58 PM, bfoman <bfo.bugmail at spamgourmet.com> wrote:
> Many bugs are reported by users who forgot about their reports. When asked
> to provide more details (for instance by NEEDINFO mass mail) they [...]
> don't use LO or care anymore. [...]
> I do not think that we should babysit bug reports - already there are
> a lot of them in fdo, not mentioning other bug-trackers (novell, redhat), or
> those on aoo issues system.

>From a big-picture perspective, I don't think unanswered NEEDINFO
requests are our biggest problem (Joel - Stats?). I think that we have
1) Triaging all of our bug reports promptly
2) Fixing all of our bugs promptly

Right now we have a policy of closing old NEEDINFO bugs, so those bugs
will eventually die. They might seem like clutter in the meantime, and
we should examine how much time we spend on reports that just end up
in the NEEDINFO pile, abandoned by the bug reporter, but that's a
separate issue.

> If you do not want to register - then in Bugzilla world you just do not care
> about a bug. File and forget is not a way to do bug reports imho.

Solid stats here would be very helpful.
- What percentage of bug reports get triaged to NEEDINFO and go nowhere?
- Users will lose interest if we take a long time to triage bugs.  If
we triage within a day vs. week vs. month, how much more likely will
we get a response?  (i.e. What's the critical window in which we need
to address our bug reports?)

Also: How many bug reports require communication with the bug
reporter? If someone reports a typo and we fix it, the original report
is usually all we need.


More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list