On 11/11/2014 10:42 PM, Tommy wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:46:03 +0100, Robinson Tryon
<bishop.robin...@gmail.com> wrote:
....
moreover we have to decide if pinging just UNCONFIRMED old bugs or
even NEW
bugs (excluding the easy hacks).
if the "ping campaign" is accepted by the QA, we only have to decide
the timeframe of bugs to test...
older than 6 months or older than 1 year etc. etc.
my proposal is to ping:
UNCONFIRMED bugs older than 100 days
http://snipurl.com/29ejxgd (183 bugs)
I am not a fan at all for pinging unconfirmed bugs . . . already too
many people leave comments like "please confirm on x.x.x.x - for a user
to continue to be testing their own bugs when QA hasn't touched them
beyond asking them to continue testing is just a good way to annoy the
hell out of users. 100 days is also very short time frame (183 bugs is
nearly 25% of our total count).
NEW bugs older than 2 years (*)
http://snipurl.com/29febjl (439 bugs)
I am much more a fan of this.
Best,
Joel
_______________________________________________
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/
