On 04/17/2016 08:13 AM, Yousuf 'Jay' Philips wrote: > Hi All, > > The design team would like a 'needsUXEval' keyword added to the > keywords field, so that ux-advise bugs can be assigned that keyword > instead of having ux-advise assigned in the component field, so for > example it would be easy to search bugs in Draw that require ux-advise. > > QA members that would be assigning this new keyword rather than the > component should be aware that they would have to add the ux-advise > mailing list email to the CC list, as that isnt automatically being > set with the use of the keyword.
Question: Are QA members still just pushing to NEW? Are we leaving in UNCONFIRMED with some reasonable expectation that UX will tackle them? Currently we just immediate toss the bug to NEW without confirming to get them out of the UNCONFIRMED stack. Personally, I think that this is preferred because without this QA members will: (1) be seeing these bugs over and over again with no insight as to whether they are valid; (2) New QA members might be confused and just push them to NEW and confirm without knowing UX methods; (3) it might leads to QA members bickering over the best UX practice when this is a job for UX, not QA. Joel _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: https://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/
