@Lera, *, First thank you for taking on the translation tasks, we know it can be challenging.
Lera Goncharuk wrote > Do I understand correctly, that we should consult with developers when a > bug > violates principles of mathematical calculations and we give the status > NEW > only when developers confirm than bug can be fixed? > Do mathematical rules no longer apply to LibreOffice? > What should I tell users? Regards, fdo#86576 <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86576> No, I would not characterize the QA process that way. Setting NEW has nothing to do with determining if something can or should be fixed. Rather, it depends on the comfort of the QA volunteer in making an assignment, or asking for more information. If issue as reported can be reproduced it can be set status NEW--or as Andy has done--leave it UNCONFIRMED and invite other QA or Devs to review. There will be issues that clearly are incorrect function, as this is. And there are issues that are marginal, and are better classified as Enhancement to the existing function. Stuart -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-question-about-a-bug-confirmation-tp4130078p4130093.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/
