[Libreoffice-qa] "No activity" warnings - EasyHacks

[Jan Holesovsky]

Hi Joel, Tommy,

Tommy píše v Pá 24. 10. 2014 v 22:22 +0200:

> >> I suppose we shouldn't be sending these to EasyHacks - I guess it's
> >> worth treating them separately :-)  Is it possible to skip EasyHacks
> >> when sending these, please?
> > What would be the rationale for skipping them for easy hacks? These get
> > fixed just as inadvertently as other bugs. Just curious

The Easy Hacks usually are a kind of features; and features are usually
unlikely to be fixed / implemented inadvertently...

>From my point of view, it would be better to batch-review the EasyHacks
I guess - to see that they really are Easy Hacks - with existing,
reasonable code pointers, etc.

But that's probably hard to do ATM, so I'd avoid any "retest pings"
there; or at least phrase them differently - in the Easy Hacks, the
pings shouldn't be about retesting, but more about the review of the
Easy Hack itself, because the fact that it was not taken might indicate
that it is not an Easy Hack in the first place :-)

> maybe Jan is complaining of the spam that is generated in the dev list by  
> any "retest ping" message that hits easy hacks.

No, I did not mean that, sorry for not being clear.

All the best,
Kendy