Hey Terrence,
> On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 10:03 -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
>> Top posting again:
>>
>> The mass ping has been done. If I'm poked once a month as a reminder
>> I'll do it monthly so that the list is manageable.
>>
>> here is a link that I believe we can monitor:
>> https://bugs.freedeskt
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 10:03 -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
> Top posting again:
>
> The mass ping has been done. If I'm poked once a month as a reminder
> I'll do it monthly so that the list is manageable.
>
> here is a link that I believe we can monitor:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug
Top posting again:
The mass ping has been done. If I'm poked once a month as a reminder
I'll do it monthly so that the list is manageable.
here is a link that I believe we can monitor:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&chfieldfrom=2015-01-05&chfieldto=Now&email1=qa-admin%40l
On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 04:37:07PM -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
> Suggestions to get around this welcome.
Hmm, yeah. For now, I just linked between the two pages, hopeful that this
would limit possible confusion.
Best,
Bjoern
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 18:00:47 +0100, Joel Madero
wrote:
Hi All,
On Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:02:35 +0100, V Stuart Foote
wrote:
jmadero wrote
why not using a special whiteboard tag like "ping", "pingQA" or
"ping012, "ping02" etc. etc. ?
I'm not completely opposed but I hate cluttering the whi
Hey Bjoern,
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 03:47:52PM -0500, Robinson Tryon wrote:
>> Taskified:
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Gardening#Task:_Bugs_untouched_for_a_year
> Hmm, seeing that wiki page:
>
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Gardening
>
> I wonder
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 03:47:52PM -0500, Robinson Tryon wrote:
> Taskified:
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Gardening#Task:_Bugs_untouched_for_a_year
Hmm, seeing that wiki page:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Bugzilla/Gardening
I wonder if it shouldnt be folded i
Hi All,
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:02:35 +0100, V Stuart Foote
> wrote:
>
>> jmadero wrote
why not using a special whiteboard tag like "ping", "pingQA" or
"ping012, "ping02" etc. etc. ?
>>> I'm not completely opposed but I hate cluttering the whiteboard even
>>> more...if others agree, I
On Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:02:35 +0100, V Stuart Foote
wrote:
jmadero wrote
why not using a special whiteboard tag like "ping", "pingQA" or
"ping012, "ping02" etc. etc. ?
I'm not completely opposed but I hate cluttering the whiteboard even
more...if others agree, I will do so.
No objections,
s, and I like the "pingQA" whiteboard tag. Just one would keep
query simple when reused. Can always check dates assigned in the bug history
so no need to tailor it each round.
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-ping-to-retest-old-
Hey Tommy,
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 21:57:24 +0100, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Can you capture and publish a list of the bugs you ping this way?
>>> Then we can:
>> So FDO sucks for this kind of task BUT we can just search for bugs
>> touched by qa-admin account on the day that I run
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 21:57:24 +0100, Joel Madero
wrote:
Can you capture and publish a list of the bugs you ping this way?
Then we can:
So FDO sucks for this kind of task BUT we can just search for bugs
touched by qa-admin account on the day that I run itnot ideal and
things will b
On 12/30/2014 12:41 PM, Terrence Enger wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-12-30 at 09:01 -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
>> Hey Tommy,
>>
>> Top posting because this is finally happening. Before running it
>> officially I'd like to allow people to see the text I'm using and the
>> query I'm going to use it on.
>>
>>
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Joel Madero wrote:
> Hey Tommy,
>
> Top posting because this is finally happening. Before running it
> officially I'd like to allow people to see the text I'm using and the
> query I'm going to use it on.
>
> Text: http://pastebin.com/7GiJnj7N (note, not looking f
On Tue, 2014-12-30 at 09:01 -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
> Hey Tommy,
>
> Top posting because this is finally happening. Before running it
> officially I'd like to allow people to see the text I'm using and the
> query I'm going to use it on.
>
> Text: http://pastebin.com/7GiJnj7N (note, not looking
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:01:43 +0100, Joel Madero
wrote:
.
Let me know if the query looks okay. Thanks all, sorry for the horrible
delay :)
Best,
Joel
looks good to me.
go ahead!!! :-)
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address:
-
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-ping-to-retest-old-bugs-tp4125930p4134522.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoff
Hey Tommy,
Top posting because this is finally happening. Before running it
officially I'd like to allow people to see the text I'm using and the
query I'm going to use it on.
Text: http://pastebin.com/7GiJnj7N (note, not looking for nit-picky, but
if there is a serious problem with it, please le
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 23:30:01 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
but we are constantly doing this with NEEDINFO bugs...
once in a while I get a bunch of email from NEEDINFO bugs I'm on CC.
it doesn't disturbs me at all.
Developers have complained about it - and have asked that we do it
sparingly
On 10/17/2014 01:21 AM, Tommy wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:47:05 +0200, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>
>> I'm honestly hesitant to do any more of this kind of thing with the
>> email notification on. Devs hate it, users hate it, etc . . . Our bug
>> tracker is making progress, IMHO this can wait until
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 21:18:44 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen
wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 04:03:47AM +0200, Tommy wrote:
"your bug report has shown no activity in the last 6 months. newer
LibO releases with hundred of bugifixes and new features have been
releases meanwhile, so please retest
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:47:05 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
I'm honestly hesitant to do any more of this kind of thing with the
email notification on. Devs hate it, users hate it, etc . . . Our bug
tracker is making progress, IMHO this can wait until we get it fully up.
Just my two cents.
Best,
On 10/24/2014 09:13 AM, bfoman wrote:
> jmadero wrote
>> andI'm an idiot who used a bad query so now the results are going to
>> suck. Dammit.
>> Joel (annoyed with myself)
> Hi!
> You should change your default columns and add Changed and Number of
> comments. This way you will see on Cha
his message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-ping-to-retest-old-bugs-tp4126132p4126753.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.f
On 10/23/2014 01:09 PM, Tommy wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 19:40:14 +0200, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>
>> andI'm an idiot who used a bad query so now the results are going to
>> suck. Dammit.
>>
>>
>> Joel (annoyed with myself)
>>
>
> do you mean that you sent the "retest message" to bugs that
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 19:40:14 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
andI'm an idiot who used a bad query so now the results are going to
suck. Dammit.
Joel (annoyed with myself)
do you mean that you sent the "retest message" to bugs that were not
inactive from more than 1 year?
for exampl
andI'm an idiot who used a bad query so now the results are going to
suck. Dammit.
Joel (annoyed with myself)
On 10/23/2014 07:40 AM, Tommy wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:16:03 +0200, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>
>>
P.S. You can query the qa-admin account for comments and see the
On 10/23/2014 07:40 AM, Tommy wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:16:03 +0200, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>>
>> 10/25 got user response (that's pretty damn good :-b)
>
> that's 40%.
>
>> only 1/25 has been resolved (not so good :-b)
>
> that's 4% which is not not so good but not that bad after all
I just
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:16:03 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
P.S. You can query the qa-admin account for comments and see the bugs
that I touch with that account to get an idea.
could you please give a direct link... I'm not very good with bugzilla
queries :-(
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/bu
>>
>> P.S. You can query the qa-admin account for comments and see the bugs
>> that I touch with that account to get an idea.
>
>
> could you please give a direct link... I'm not very good with bugzilla
> queries :-(
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bu
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:28:20 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
...
Running the oldest set of 81 bugs would be an interesting test, just
to see what percentage of bug reporters return to add a comment to the
bug.
...
I'm pretty sure that there's tons of old NEW bugs that have turned
into WORKSFORME
On 10/22/2014 09:58 PM, Tommy wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 07:18:47 +0200, Robinson Tryon
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Tommy wrote:
>>> For 900 (2y 6m) --> 81 bugs
>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&f1=days_elapsed&limit=0&list_id=481870&o1=greaterthan&
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 07:18:47 +0200, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Tommy wrote:
For 900 (2y 6m) --> 81 bugs
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&f1=days_elapsed&limit=0&list_id=481870&o1=greaterthan&order=bug_id%20DESC&product=LibreOffice&query_for
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 07:18:47 +0200, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Tommy wrote:
so a ping retest mail campaign could be at the moment tested just with
the
older subsets (730d or 900d) to not generate an excessive spam.
Running the oldest set of 81 bugs wou
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Tommy wrote:
> For 900 (2y 6m) --> 81 bugs
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&f1=days_elapsed&limit=0&list_id=481870&o1=greaterthan&order=bug_id%20DESC&product=LibreOffice&query_format=advanced&v1=900
>
> so a ping retest mail campaign could
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:47:05PM -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
> I'm honestly hesitant to do any more of this kind of thing with the
> email notification on. Devs hate it, users hate it, etc . . . Our bug
> tracker is making progress, IMHO this can wait until we get it fully up.
> Just my two cents.
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 09:56:03 +0200, Florian Reisinger
wrote:
Hi,
For 180d (1/2y)
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&f1=days_elapsed&list_id=481820&o1=greaterthan&product=LibreOffice&query_format=advanced&v1=180
[162 bugs]
And for 365d (1y)
https://bugs.freedes
Hi,
For 180d (1/2y)
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&f1=days_elapsed&list_id=481820&o1=greaterthan&product=LibreOffice&query_format=advanced&v1=180
[162 bugs]
And for 365d (1y)
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&f1=days_elapsed&list_id
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 05:22:56 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
Okay - if you want I'll run this with my normal needinfo cleanup on the
first of the month. How's that sound?
Best,
Joel
sounds nice. I suggest to wait a few days more for the release of LibO
4.3.3 (Week 44 , Oct 27, 2014 - Nov 2, 20
Okay - if you want I'll run this with my normal needinfo cleanup on the
first of the month. How's that sound?
Best,
Joel
On 10/17/2014 07:22 PM, Tommy wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 00:30:52 +0200, Joel Madero
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds great - so let's try to come up with a concrete plan that
>> every
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 00:30:52 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
Sounds great - so let's try to come up with a concrete plan that
everyone (or most) sign off on and then just do a thumbs up or down
vote. Let's try to not get too picky about the details.
@Tommy - you mind giving a proposed consistent p
Sounds great - so let's try to come up with a concrete plan that
everyone (or most) sign off on and then just do a thumbs up or down
vote. Let's try to not get too picky about the details.
@Tommy - you mind giving a proposed consistent plan of attack? If you
want me to briefly write something up l
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Aleksandr P wrote:
> 2014-10-16 23:00 GMT+04:00 bfoman :
>> 1) If they see the bug has gone they should mark as WORKSFORME
>> 2) if bug persist they should drop a note and leave status UNCHANGED
>> 3) if nobody answers we do nothing and leave status UNCHANGED
>
> I
On 10/17/2014 11:16 AM, Aleksandr P wrote:
> Hello.
> I believe that it is a good idea to check old bugs.
>
> 2014-10-16 23:00 GMT+04:00 bfoman :
>> Tommy wrote
>> If they see the bug has gone they should mark as WORKSFORME
>> if bug persist they should drop a note and leave status UNCHANGED
>> if
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 04:03:47AM +0200, Tommy wrote:
> "your bug report has shown no activity in the last 6 months. newer
> LibO releases with hundred of bugifixes and new features have been
> releases meanwhile, so please retest with current LibO release
> (4.3.2.2) and give feedback of the
Hello.
I believe that it is a good idea to check old bugs.
2014-10-16 23:00 GMT+04:00 bfoman :
> Tommy wrote
> If they see the bug has gone they should mark as WORKSFORME
> if bug persist they should drop a note and leave status UNCHANGED
> if nobody answers we do nothing and leave status UNCHANG
I'm honestly hesitant to do any more of this kind of thing with the
email notification on. Devs hate it, users hate it, etc . . . Our bug
tracker is making progress, IMHO this can wait until we get it fully up.
Just my two cents.
Best,
Joel
On 10/16/2014 10:40 PM, Tommy wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:26:48 +0200, Joel Madero
wrote:
Best,
Joel
P.S. Again I think all of this should wait until we have our own bug
tracker so we can suppress emails and not piss off everyone cc'ed on
every bug . . .
maybe we can give email notification just to the bug reporter in
Hi,
There are enough bugs foxes in Fresh. I would like to explain it to them
(Fresh/Stable/Master) and give them the choice. Ala "if you choose master more
bugs can be fixed, but terribly things can happen". "Stable is our most stable
version. Fresh and master could have more bugs fixed, but cou
I'm a fan of doing a summary of all reported bugs for every bug reporter
in one single email that summarizes the current status, thanks them for
the continuing support, and then asks them to retest against the latest
stable. Preferably we do this around x.x.3 or so (enough time where
regressions ar
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 21:00:16 +0200, bfoman
wrote:
Tommy wrote
we currently have 799 UNCONFIRMED and 7793 NEW bugs.
I think that there should be a consistent number of those who did not
receive any new comment in the last 6 months.
[...]
meanwhile, so please retest with current LibO release (
.4 BH
session.
Best regards.
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-ping-to-retest-old-bugs-tp4125930p4126029.html
Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing lis
Hi QA guys,
I had this idea and I want to hear what you think about.
we currently have 799 UNCONFIRMED and 7793 NEW bugs.
I think that there should be a consistent number of those who did not
receive any new comment in the last 6 months.
i.e.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61972
53 matches
Mail list logo
