|
From: | Federico Bruni |
Subject: | Re: verification and bulk edit [Re: Unverified issues?] |
Date: | Sun, 29 Sep 2013 19:44:32 +0200 |
It matches the theory. In practice, I've been startled quite a few
times when bug squad members not just verified the commit to be present
but also reported back when it turned out that the claimed functionality
did not actually accompany the commit.
The verification you spell out here could be done by a web crawler and
would be done in seconds. The verification from the bug squad appears
to do a more thorough job on average.
When changing the issue tracker, you get a field for specifying what the
tracker should do next after changing the current issue. If you use "go
to next issue", it will move to the next issue matching the search.
That seems rather efficient, and it would appear that the bug squad
reading the issue description and possibly more leads to an improvement
of the results.
The question is whether we can significantly improve the efficiency
without sacrificing more quality than desirable.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |