> > Have you tried? Maybe some will say no (and they can continue to work on the > Master branch) and some may agree. > > Do all QA people say No when you ask them to have a Bug Hunting session? Why > would ALL devs say No??? > > Why is it impossible to have a Bug Squashing Session for devs? I bet some > would find it challenging to fix more bugs than the others. > > Why is it "literally impossible" to have a fix branch? Has something similar > been proposed at the ESC meeting and rejected?
Over the years this has come up and *many* of our most experienced developers flatly rejected the idea. Why not just try what is much much easier which is bisecting and cc'ing individual developers, politely asking them to fix the problems? This way the person responsible for the breakage is the one fixing it (instead of asking person Y to potentially fix the problem caused by person X). Without QA doing its job fully (not bisecting) then we're wasting developer time doing the job of QA. This conversation is going in circles - there are a lot of assumptions (from both side) and I'm not going to lead such an effort to try to force volunteer hands. Feel free to email the developer list and try to recruit developers to do what you're asking. No one is stopping you from doing this :) Doing it when many (most) of the regressions are not fully triaged might be a frustrating process for all involved. 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/
