[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: issues to verify

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: issues to verify
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 05:42:56 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 04:51:33PM +0300, Dmytro O. Redchuk wrote:
> On Fri 28 Oct 2011, 14:44 Phil Holmes wrote:
> > I think we do need the version number where the fix is claimed -
> > otherwise we would test fixes that aren't yet available in GUB, and
> > find they don't work.
> Well.. I think _we_ do need, really.. BugSquad, I mean. Do developers need it?
> Should we require these labels be assigned?

They were initially started by developers, and I think they're
still a good idea.  I think you should add that label for anything
that's missing it -- as long as you keep the "issues to verify"
list at 0 entries after a GUB release, anything that's claimed as
fixed but doesn't have a fixed_x_y_z tag can be just set to the
next devel version number.

If there's anything in the backlog that you can't figure out, then
ask about that issue and we'll get it cleared up.  If you don't
have an answer in... oh, 3 days?... then ask again.  If you still
don't have an answer in another 3 days, then ask again, but less
politely.  etc.

- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]