Hi Andre, > James Mckenzie schrieb: >> Finished Base tests. Issue 49204 is still with us? > > Of course it is. And a good example why it is hard to encourage people > to do more than one TCM test-run. We do always the same tests - and find > the same errors again and again. > > <ironic> > Maybe we should implemen templates in TCM? "Click here to set known > issues as failed". > </ironic>
Hmm. Didn't even know this issue comes from TCM. Anyway. Please look at issues targeted "2.x", with owner "oj" or "fs", and you'll see that the Base team has a lot of other things to do, before fixing a "P4 OOoLater" task. As much as I understand that it's frustrating to report/QA bugs which don't get attention for years, that's, as said in another thread here, a matter of resources and priorities. And, in the hope this doesn't sound too harsh: I would not be willing to spend any (non-negligible) amount of time into an issue just to satisfy TCM (or any other QA process, for that matter). That is, if the bug does have a very limited impact only *in real life* (as indicated by the priority), then I'd consider it a waste of precious resources to fix it before the more important issues. I know that in testtool, as well as in the automated UNO API test scripts, there are mechanisms to log such "this is a known bug with number #i12345#" events, and to *not* count them as test error. I'd say TCM needs something similar - simply because QA resources are equally precious, and should not be wasted, too. Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
