Hi Drew, On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Drew Jensen<[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes you are right - the question was rooted in the value of the 'close' step > in the QA process. > > On that subject I think the the benefit of checking against the snapshot > builds to 'close' an issue was made quite well a couple of emails back.
No, that was only theoretical benefit.. Still the question is: Is it really worth it? How many issues are reopened at all after being set to verified? Of those that are reopened: How many were reopened while set to verified, i.e. directly after integration in the new master? Or were those reopened because of an other cws did revert the fix in a newer milestone? Of those that are set to verified, how many actually contain enough info of being checked by volunteers? (as mentioned: A BIG problem on QA-IRC bugdays) Given all that: Is it worth spending the time closing verified issues or would it more effective to spend that time of handling the non-fixed issues (harvest duplicates, confirm unconfirmed issues,...)? To me that question is not solved at all. ciao Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
