[Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla: Adding new Status for 'abandoned' bugs?

Norbert Thiebaud nthiebaud at gmail.com
Mon Nov 9 10:23:12 PST 2015

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Joel Madero <jmadero.dev at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
>> Insufficient Data though can also be used for situations where a bug can
>> not be reproduced due to, well, insufficient data.. i.e. happened one
>> time crash and no stack trace, no exact steps to reproduce, even if the
>> reporter was or would be willing to provide ... all cases where
>> WORKSFORME sounds a bit odd and lax (which is a valid resolution if the
>> given steps do not lead to the described failure), but ABANDONED
>> wouldn't fit either, IMHO..
> True - I'm happy with either of them. I'm not so sure this will tame the
> rude users from going on rants about having to provide sufficient
> information but it's a start :)

I do not care either about the exact wording... the only point I'm
looking to improve upon is that
'Works for me' is a cop-out and is bound to put the recipient in a bad
mood even a willing and cooperative reporter.
I'd like wording that reflect that the bug is not just 'ignored' or
the report dismissed, but that it cannot be acted upon, due to
a lack of follow up by the reporter or other in position to reproduce,
or due to an apparent
impossibility to reproduce coupled with a lack of exploitable data
from the original report.

Yes it won't prevent some of the outburst we see on occasion, but at
least it won't feed the beast


More information about the Libreoffice-qa mailing list