On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 05/08/2013 Rob Weir wrote: >> >> I'd love to hear your thoughts on this, even if it is just a quick +1. > > > Here's my quick +1, with a question: when I report a bug (typically a small > regression) that I would like to see fixed in the possible 4.0.1 release, > shall I already set the Target to 4.0.1? In ancient times this was left to > the developer who had accepted the bug, but we are now less strict in > Bugzilla usage. And setting the target to 4.0.1 would help in evaluating > if/when we need a 4.0.1. >
That question probably deserves its own thread. IMHO we need to decide what a 4.0.1 is: 1) We might want to have it contain fixes for only the most urgent bugs. We could include new translations that are available as well. If we make that restriction then the QA impact is less. We don't need to do a complete regression test pass. If we did that then we could use the "release blocker" field to track these issues. We'd only fix issues in 4.0.1 that have been discussed as release blockers. 2) Or we could open 4.0.1 up to all changes, in which case new bugs can be introduced anywhere, possible translation impact, etc. Personally I think 4.0.1 should be more like #1 -- strictly limited to specific bug fixes. We then use 4.1 (the trunk) for non-urgent fixes. -Rob > Regards, > Andrea. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: qa-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
