This all seems to be coming down to my current workflow about
enhancement bugs that i'm opening. To my knowledge, there has been only
two bug reports that i have not given enough information, which resulted
in them being set to NEEDINFO, which i then followed up with more
As i'm opening enhancement requests, sometimes i seek the advise of more
experienced users to know whether the enhancement is a good idea or not,
which can be seen in the two examples previously quoted.
If the QA team doesnt wish to give their input into these enhancement
requests, then i think the simplest thing to do is to set them all as
ux-advise rather than what i currently do of assigning it to the
component and CC ux-advise. I guess my main issue is not knowing what is
considered ux-advise and what isnt.
On 12/17/2014 06:08 PM, Sophie wrote:
Hi Kendy, all,
Le 17/12/2014 12:47, Jan Holesovsky a écrit :
Sophie píše v Út 16. 12. 2014 v 19:16 +0100:
Discussing with QA team today, there has been a lot of bug reports
concerning minor enhancements these last days.
It would be better is those enhancements would be first discussed by the
UX team before going to QA for triage because most of the time they
don't have the requested info regarding bug filling then QA team has to
spend a lot of time to reproduce them and this is not up to the QA team
to discuss UX enhancements.
Please can you send few examples to have a better idea? :-)
or see this list:
Ah! - so Jay is a very active member of the Design Team, and discusses
his proposals the right way; so I am not really concerned about these
reports :-) - they will be handled properly, I am sure.
ok, no problem, Jay is an example (and great to see him so active here
now :) but that will help to set the good process between the teams.
So to get them out of the stats - does the NEEDINFO + ux-advise
component (as Stuart proposed) work for you, Sophie? Jay - can you
please mark your reports that way if yes?
Well, I'm only the messenger here. So let me make the proposal to the QA
team during their meeting this evening, and I'll report back to you, but
I guess they will be ok with Stuart proposal and yours.
Yes, but that is a lot of work for bug triagers. If you well know the
functionality, it's easy to discriminate, but for QA people who do not
have that knowledge, the lack of steps to reproduce, examples, etc. is
very time consuming plus the fact that he won't know what to do with it
(50% of users would like to have it and the other 50% won't), when it
can be solved quickly by discussing a little bit.
Sure, as I did not have the examples, I did not know exactly what you
had in mind :-)
Ok, thanks a lot to Stuart and you to help me clarify it :)
To unsubscribe e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy