Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index



Hey there,
Jay, *,

Not sure that codifying a bunch of "approved" QA exchanges is in the best interest of moving the QA 
process along--especially if we have to dig them out of a WiKi.   It would not do much to improve the QA 
flow, nor improve the readability of issues over their life span.

Otherwise, during triage we should all strive to be courteous.  By itself,  the automated  message delivered  "*** 
This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug xxxxx ***" is a bit too terse in closing a NEW issue as duplicate.  
But believe including a simple "thank you" for posting would suffice.

If too many bugs like fdo#82701 are making it through,  then the Bugzilla and BSA "duplicate" issue 
filters may need to be improved.
I don't think he was trying to codify - maybe more just saying "I'm posting these to the wiki - feel free to use (or not use) them at your pleasure :) I've thought of doing similar things with my auto responses but of course everyone can use their own methodology :)


Best,
Joel

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.