On 03/06/2015 12:11 AM, Alex Thurgood wrote: > Le 06/03/2015 05:52, Joel Madero a écrit : > > Hi Joel, > >> I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts about bugs that have backtraces >> but QA has been unable to repro. Should these just be pushed to NEW ? >> >> Currently there are 8 UNCONFIRMED crashers - at least one or two of >> those have backtraces but have had other members of QA say they cannot >> reproduce. >> > Got a link for those issues handy ? https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/buglist.cgi?list_id=525899®etlastlist=525899
There are the 8 crashers currently reported and unconfirmed. At least 2 of them have backtraces - one of the other ones has some kind of a system dump or something... If we can just mark as NEW then I suggest we start automatically asking users to do a backtrace (at least suggest and link to the wiki). Might save a few rounds of NEEDINFO -> UNCONFIRMED -> NEEDINFO -> WFM -> UNCONFIRMED ;) Best, Joel > > Alex > > _______________________________________________ > List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list > Mail address: libreoffice...@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/ _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice