Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Minutes - QA Call 01/11/2013

I read quickly this thread, so certainly I'll repeat some things from one or
another person here but here's what I'm doing:
- if "NEW" or "UNCONFIRMED" and need some info (just 1 or several), I put a
comment and put State to NEEDINFO
- if "NEEDINFO" without feedback for at least 2 months:
   - either I could give a try and it worked for me so WFM
   - or I couldn't give a try (not the same env, not example file when
necessary, etc.), put it INVALID
(if reporter didn't answer and we need more info to advance, no need to pile
up this bug which became useless)

 In both cases, I put a comment explaining why I update like this and
indicate that the bug can be reopened if it can be reproduced with a newer
version  (last one if possible)  when quite old version (ie < 3.6.X), and in
this case, asking also for adding information demanded in previous comment.

Perhaps I made some exceptions but I try not putting a bug from "NEW" or
"UNCONFIRMED" to WFM or INVALID.

Julien



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Minutes-QA-Call-11-16-2012-tp4019791p4030997.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.