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

Michael Stahl mstahl at redhat.com
Tue Nov 10 03:59:44 PST 2015

On 09.11.2015 23:11, Tommy wrote:
> Joel Madero wrote:
>>> I think we should keep labeling those as INVALID
>>> IMHO the time spent to implement this new
>>> ABANDONED/EXPIRED/WHATEVERstate will be almost useless...
>>> in both cases the fault of the bug closure is the reporting user
>>> so I really do not care at all being diplomatic with people who don't
>>> provide necessary informations.
>> To put this in context - this began after several users over the course
>> of a few weeks got quite irate at the WFM/Invalid status.
> I don't understand why those people should feel irate or offended if the 
> INVALID state is due to their deficiency to provide a valide testcase or 
> answers to legitimate QA questions...

i think it's just poor usability of bugzilla.  the word INVALID sort of
makes it sound like it should never have been filed in the first place
and it's all the reporter's fault, while e.g. INSUFFICIENT_DATA is
somewhat weaker in assigning blame to the reporter - it may be there's a
valid bug, but we just don't have enough data to fix anything.

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list