Hi Rainer
Rainer Bielefeld-2 wrote > you are completely wrong, I doubt that you read the linked texts. I did read the texts. Have you considered the hypothesis that YOU might be wrong? You are confusing QA work with a reporter's work. Someone who submits a bug is going to report the version where he found the bug. He is not going to install previous versions to check back. That is QA work. So maybe there should be two separate fields: one for the reporter to indicate in which version he observed the bug and another field for the QA (or the reporter if he is willing to do that) to report in which version it was first observed (if it is a new bug, i.e. not a regression then both fields match) In the QA field ALL versions including the 3.3 branch should show up. Maybe in the user field only actively developed versions should show up? If bugs are not going to be fixed in EOL branches it makes more sense to advise the user to update to a live branch and then to report the bug if it still exists... Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-Lifecycle-of-builds-tp4048583p4049059.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
