Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-qa] 3.5.0 QA ... from BHS 1 to BHS 2

Hi Michael,

Michael Meeks wrote (25-01-12 11:18)

> On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 23:10 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote:
> > The idea/hope is, that faster/smarter fixing of bugs, leads to a shift
> > in the time spending: less weeks on bug fixing and more on features.
>
>         Sure - of course, those bugs need good visibility; they need to be
> marked 'most annoying' if they are major issues as early as possible. So
> this 'initial bug' date is (to me) uninteresting. There are thousands of
> bugs, if we have serious / critical stoppers they need to be
> -immediately- associated with the most annoying bug, or at least
> suggested there in a comment [ NB. as we add a dependency we need to add
> the bug in a comment too to have this date ;-].

agree agree.

> > Examples:
> > - 45068 Update from 3.4.4 on Win not possible without ...

>         so - we got a same-day workaround; but the bug was not prioritised for
> six months ? :-)

Yep .. problem ;-)

> > - 41054 Saving problem ods with new sheets
> >       initial report 2011-09-20
> >       fixed for 3.5 2012-01-10
> >       fixed for 3.4 still pending
>
>         added 3.4 most annoying 2012-01-13 after the 3.4.5 release ;-)

Indeed that problem.

> Hopefully it'll make it into 3.4.6 somewhen before we do that release
> until we do - not a big issue.

Up to the moment that some professional user starts to update a 
spreadsheet application, which only happens now and then, and finds 
her/himself in disgrieve.

> > - 39118 Charts do not update
>         added to 3.4 most annoying: 2012-01-13 - also after the 3.4.5 release;
> six months after filing.

Indeed.

> > (pls don't ask me to provide more examples)
>
>         Sure - please do :-)

:-) No I won't: the three examples are enough to show where our mutual 
effort / process is too week.


>         What I see here is that (for whatever reason) serious bugs (or at least
> bugs with easy fixes which we could easily back-port) are not being
> raised at the place that we track these things carefully before release
> at, such that we have time to deal with them.

Yes, that might well be the core of the problem. Too few capable eyes 
that can spend enough time on it

> > Another reason: lack of triage / bundling of issues, which is both
> > important for developers (fixing) ans users (simple how-to's for work
> > around).
>
>         Right - it is a serious issue as you say; we need to get better
> visibility into easy-to-back-port, and/or blocker-like bugs. And we need
> to get that earlier.

Yep, let's continue to work on that.

Thanks,
Cor
--
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org