To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=65006
User ace_dent changed the following:
What |Old value |New value
================================================================================
CC|'rainerbielefeld' |'ace_dent,rainerbielefeld'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution| |DUPLICATE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|The issue management vor v|The issue management for v
|otes is faulty |otes is faulty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun May 18 21:16:34 +0000
2008 -------
Dear 'raindrops',
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I will try to answer some of your
important concerns as briefly as possible. I also want to assure you that it was
not my intention to cause you any distress!
(1) Andrew, I doubt whether you ever read through this issue. Probably this is a
software-generated post attached to ALL old issues.
- Correct (partly). The first stage - stirring up User feedback- was automated
based on reasonable criteria. In this case, you had over 1 year to argue against
the 'resolved' status and change it to 're-opened'. The second stage (as you can
see) will require QA time to go through every response and individual issue. The
reason step 1 was automated, is that there are thousands (~5k issues) which are
old and gathering dust. It is much more efficient if the original reporter takes
responsibility for their Issue and closes it if possible, to minimize this
effort. It is about distributing rather than centralizing the task load.
(2) The "sweeping-under-carpet" has reached a new low.
- This is the exact opposite. The point of my actions is to bin old and
irrevelant Issues and highlight long outstanding ones. Remember, even when an
Issue has been closed it will always be available, so your comment just doesn't
stand.
(3) While the users do the first part, the Sun/OOo staff should do the rest.
So why ask the originator to raise another issue? Just clone the topic into a
new issue and start off discussion on it!
- And here is the key point(s)... Sun (company) does not equate to OOo
(community). OOo doesn't have staff (as such), just keen volunteers such as
myself - and yourself! You have just as much responsibility as a custodian for
the bug report you raised, as any other member of the OOo community. If you
bothered to raise an Issue, it is reasonable to assume you may be the only
person in the world who cares about it. I also want you to note that I have
acted as an individual, just keen to try and improve the current IssueTracker
situation.
(4) The Issuezilla management policy (DOES IT EXIST??) needs to be changed.
- There are fairly clear guidelines and policies. This brings us back to your
original Issue. Reviewing rainerbielefeld's QA (spot-on as usual), this Issue is
clearly a duplicate and breaks the principle policy of IssueTracker: One Problem
One Issue. This is will be Closed.
Please fell free to email me if you have any further questions, to avoid
treating IssueTracker like a forum...
Regards
Andrew
*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 22519 ***
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
