bugzilla mass mods
Jonathan at ErnstFamily.ch
Thu Oct 27 04:23:25 CDT 2005
Thanks for your inquiry.
Le mercredi 26 octobre 2005 à 17:21 -0700, Dan Kegel a écrit :
> maybe what you did is good, but I
> thought one had to actually verify
> a bug as fixed before one could mark it
> as verified. You seem to have subverted the
QA has looked at the bug and the resolution and agrees that the
appropriate resolution has been taken. Bugs remain in this state
until the product they were reported against actually ships, at
which point they become CLOSED.
Yes that's true, but in Wine the QA is mostly us and the people who
report the bugs to be fixed. In Wine usually when a bug is marked as
fixed and not reopened shortly after, it really means that it's fixed
and thus verified. What I feel is that people reporting bugs, you and me
and others actually ARE Wine's QA.
I don't think that having ~800 bugs marked as fixed since years was
useful. Maybe now that they are closed, the new fixed bugs can actually
be verified by some of the active QA people in Wine. There have been
more activity lately in bugzilla and keeping all these old bugs fixed
and not closed was not doing any good imho. Having about 10/15 bugs to
verify between each snapshot is much more maintainable and can hopefully
> process. Did you get consensus before starting
> these mods?
This was discussed on IRC when quite a lot of people where online (see
my message to wine-devel).
Jonathan Ernst <Jonathan at ErnstFamily.ch>
More information about the wine-devel