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

On 8/15/12 1:57 PM, Andrew Brager wrote:
Thanks for your comments.  What still remains unclear to me (not that it
matters as I have no influence/authority on anything done by anyone  -
I'm simply trying to help you all sort it out so somebody in a position
to do something can then do it) is whether the bug status was changed in
that 5 month period between when you re-confirmed the bug, and when it
was closed.

In other words, did it get changed from NEEDINFO to NEW when you
reconfirmed the bug, as was implied should have happened?  Or did it go
from NEEDINFO to CLOSED with no intervening status?  If the latter, then
in my opinion there's a bug in bugzilla as (I would think) it should
have changed when you reconfirmed the bug.  If the former, then there's
a problem with the process, not the tool.  The answers to those
questions will answer the question "which one needs fixing?"  If the
process needs fixing, then in my opinion there needs to be additional
status flags and additional feedback from the developers as I previously

Based on Florien's post, it sounds like he only closed those that were
in the NEEDINFO state, which implies there's a bug in bugzilla as I
state above.

I think there is another possibility, and that is that the bug lifecycle
is dubious. See,

With respect to LO bugs,  it is still unclear what the various stages of
the bug lifecycle is, and who is empowered to make various changes to
the bug status. As an unempowered user I cannot "confirm" a bug.
Moreover, there is no context help available regarding status hierarchy.

What I think I am seeing, as in so many such projects,  is a disconnect
between what devs think is happening and what bug reporters think is

For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.