Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I thought the idea was that if a bug gets voted to a confirmed > > state than the developer would have a pretty good idea that the > > bug is in fact valid. > > Sure, but you still want him to be able to reproduce it easily. > > > > > I was also under the impression that if the bug is not in a NEW > > state that most developers (pixel, and fcrozat being an exception > > for sure) don't even look at it. Is this not the case? > > I can't tell you for sure,
afaic most bugs i fixed were unconfirmed > but I would guess developers look at confirmed bugs first. afaic, sometimes, i look at "interesting" bug reports subjects, i do a pass on bugs on drak<XYZ>, ... sometimes, i just reassign bugs or close them as duplicated bugs having good product, self (still short) explanation subject, instantenous to understand body helps fixing bugs. as for tools, try running them from console and reporting errors (real ones such as exceptions, not perl warnings) help a lot.
