Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Thanks for the advice. I thought I had included the qa list, my mistake. As
for the length, I agree and I almost didn't include it but that was an
email in response to mine so I felt a bit obligated to respond despite the
length.

I had another side question, the response to the thread was made here:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Cleaning-bug-list-td3988836i20.html#a3991106


I never got an email about the response, instead it was only part of the
digest. Is this the norm because the response was made through nabble? I
was just lucky that I read the digest and saw that there was a response,
otherwise that person would have never heard back from me about all of his
concerns.

Thanks again for the feedback, I think this topic is about exhausted at
least for now. I'll get something up on the site where you suggested as
well as a little blurb about it unless Rainer suggests otherwise.


Joel

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.cz> wrote:

Hi Joel,

Joel Madero píše v Út 19. 06. 2012 v 13:36 -0700:
I moved this to a new thread because the subject here didn't really
accurately portray the direction of the conversation

The mail includes many good questions and proposals that might move us
forward. I'll try to answer it later this week.

Just a hint. In the future, I suggest to do NOT solve too many problems
in one mail. Too long mails are discouraging. They are hard to read
after few replies. I write such mails from time to time as well and I am
always told that they are hard to handle ;-)

In addition, I suggest to use formatting using spaces and tabs. Some
people use text-only mail clients (pine) and they do not see the bold
text :-)

Finally, we need to add libreoffice-qa mailing list into CC for replies
to the other mail. It is affecting the QA job.

 but I wanted to say I have uploaded the latest flowchard:



https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/0/06/Prioritizing_Bugs_Flowchart.jpg


I wasn't sure how or if I needed a wiki page or if I should just link
to the jpg in the Useful Links section of the Bug Triage wiki page.
Any thoughts? If you could respond on the other thread (more accurate
subject) that would be great, if not here is fine. Thanks all for the
input, I think that this is at least a decent start.

I would add it instead of
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport_Details#Severity
and add extra step for this into the BugTriage process.
I hope that Rainer is not against.

Thanks for the nice flowchart and working on triaging the bugs.


Best Regards,
Petr





Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: 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.