Hi Frank, *, On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 03:21:00PM +0200, Frank Schönheit wrote: > [regressions/flag with regression keyword - but not all regressions > are equal,...] > Thus, our proposal: > > For the three categories mentioned above, the issues are handled as follows: > > 1. After adding a justification (i.e. saying that the "regression" is > not considered a regression, but an implementation of a new/changed > concept), the issue is handled as usual. No particular keyword is to be > set. Any already existent regression keyword is to be revoked. > > In case that the changed functionality/behaviour is controversial, this > should be discussed in the project and if needed, escalated to the > project lead (next step of escalation would be project leads list).
We already saw how good that works :-/ (the page-format in "File"-menu issue, plugin and applets in impress as two examples :-(() My request to the council was ignored so far/is still not answered. http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=agenda&msgNo=3146 http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=agenda&msgNo=3243 http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=928 > 2. The keyword "regression" is added to the issue (if not already > present), together with a comment stating that the issue is not > considered a blocker for the next release. The target is set to the next > train release (e.g. "OOo 2.x") or "OOo later", depending on the > judgement of the issue's severity. After that, the issue is handled as > usual. In particular, depending on user feedback (e.g. votes), it might > be decided to fix the issue in the next release. This is sill workarounding lack of features in IssueZilla. Other bugtrackers have both severity and priority. We only have one. And that is not really used "properly" - but mainly as an "excuse" to not fix or look at "low-priority" issues. But better than nothing. > 3. The (newly-introduced) keyword "release_blocker" is added to the > issue, the target is set to the next minor release (2.0.<something>). See above. The target-milestone should indicate that already, but well - why not. > The keyword definitions would be as follows: > regression: > This keyword can be set if functionality definately worked in an > older version, but doesn't in a newer version. It is very helpful > to give detailed information from which version to which version the > functionality broke. If this issue is considered a blocker for the > next release, the OpenOffice.org team might decide to indicate this > by setting the "release_blocker" keyword. > > release_blocker: > This keyword denotes issues which describe a regression, i.e. > functionality which worked in an older version, but is broken in a > newer version. In opposite to the "regression" keyword, > "release_blocker" marks issues which are considered a blocker for > the next maintanance release. So does this *only* apply to regressions or to other issues as well? > - When re-targeting issues becomes necessary, its clear that > "release_blocker" issues can *not* be re-targeted. Currently, this > decision would require a close examination of the argumentations in > the issue, because it is not clear whether, for instance, a regression > issue targeted to "2.0.4" has this target more intentionally or more > accidentally (and both cases are common :) . And who decides whether it is a "release_blocker" or a regular regression? - Often enough opinions differ. > [...] ciao Christian -- NP: As I Lay Dying - Reflection Join #qa.OpenOffice.org on irc.freenode.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
