Hi Kohei,
I see that you changed status of several bugs [1] with you as assignee
from status ASSIGNED to NEW.
My interpretation is that you are intending to do some work on it, but
currently that particular Bug is far at the end of your priority list
and you are not planning activity in
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Rainer Bielefeld
libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de wrote:
Hi Kohei,
I see that you changed status of several bugs [1] with you as assignee
from status ASSIGNED to NEW.
My interpretation is that you are intending to do some work on it, but
currently that
Kohei Yoshida schrieb:
No, those bugs were assigned to me originally by someone else, as part
of the very old workflow. I had no plan to work on them in the first
place.
Hi Kohei,
yes, you are completely right, those assignations were a legacy, and
it's a useful clearing up for those bugs
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Rainer Bielefeld
libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de wrote:
Actually, I could go a step further and change the assignee of these
bugs with status NEW to the default assignee to further remove
ambiguity,
It was the the core of my question whether you wanted
Time Start: 1405 UTC
Present: Peter, Florian, Joel, Joren, Thorsten
*Completed Action Items*
***Wiki for Hard Hacks – on hold until after release of 4.0 (Joel)
*Wiki page for triage contest (Joel)
*Bibisect Torrent/Mirror – No longer needed with bibisect repository
*Wiki for FDO policies/rules
c) a reminder + automated closing of bug after some period of time
+1 Something like automated closing after 3 months in NEEDINFO
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings:
On 01/26/2013 02:48 PM, Jack Leigh wrote:
c) a reminder + automated closing of bug after some period of time
+1 Something like automated closing after 3 months in NEEDINFO
Response: From developer side, they'll see a MASSIVE influx of emails,
pointed out by a core developer. This would need
