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.
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.