On 05/27/2015 07:25 AM, Caolán McNamara wrote: > There are ~190 bugs with the word "crash" in the summary in the states > new/assigned/reopened/unconfirmed. > > As with the coverity, import-testing, export-testing stuff I think it > would be helpful to start chewing into crashers in some systematic way > where progress can be measured. 190 isn't a vast number in the over all > scheme of things. > > What would work ideally for me is to someone get the subset of all > crashes that are ~100% reproducible under Linux and ordered by the > number of steps required to reproduce. Any ideas on how to generate that > subset ? Bjoern already largely addressed this but bugzilla is hugely limited for organizing.
What I think would be minimum (and can be done) is: Confirm each crash on 5.0; _Ensure_ that each has easy steps; _Ensure_ that each has been checked for regressions (and tagged accordingly in whiteboard/version field); _Ensure_ that each has a debug log; Prioritize correctly (Major/Critical High/Highest) For the most straight forward ones that have easy steps we can just mark them as critical + highest - signaling that they are easy to reproduce and everything is there for devs to tackle them. Best, Joel FYIW: I've been pushing this for about a year now ;)
_______________________________________________ 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/
