On Sep 25, 2013 11:28 AM, <bugreporte...@hushmail.com> wrote: > > Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru. > Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther. > That's what I use now: > http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/ > > Are there other assignees we should exclude?
congrats that looks very correct and complete to me. Then its just manual work to unassign. rgds jan > > > > On 25.09.2013 at 10:58 AM, bugreporte...@hushmail.com wrote: > > > >>...Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru > >Can you tell me how to invoke a bugzilla guru? Or is he already > >seeing this and just has too much work to do? > > > >>I think you need to use "search by change history". > >But in "search by change history" one only can search for changes > >(at least that's what I was thinking). > >But I want those issues with no changes. > > > > > >On 24.09.2013 at 7:06 PM, "janI" <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >>On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bugreporte...@hushmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person) > >>> ... > >>> >...if you did the unassignment, > >>> > >>> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try. > >>> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search > >>on > >>> bugzilla and it did not work. > >>> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that > >>exactly > >>> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj??? > >>> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without > >>beeing > >>> logged in): > >>> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/ > >>> > >> > >>Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can > >>hopefully > >>give you more precise ideas. > >> > >>"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status. > >>Without > >>actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by > >change > >>history". > >> > >>rgds > >>jan I. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bugreporte...@hushmail.com> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Thanks. > >>> >> Haven't seen that. > >>> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked > >>on > >>> >for 6 > >>> >> month..." means? > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the > >>> >comments) > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >> Cause for example the bug > >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was > >>reported > >>> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was > >>from > >>> >"mkca > >>> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver > >>> >Specht on > >>> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is > >marked > >>> >as a > >>> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment") > >>> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there > >>something > >>> >I missed? > >>> >> > >>> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and > >>> >assigned). > >>> > > >>> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year > >>and > >>> >assigned > >>> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The > >>> >assigned > >>> >person automatically gets a mail about the change. > >>> > > >>> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release" > >>issues > >>> >assigned > >>> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know > >it > >>is > >>> >free to > >>> >be worked on. > >>> > > >>> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an > >>> >overview of > >>> >how many issues are actually being worked on. > >>> > > >>> >rgds > >>> >jan I. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> >> > > >>> >> >Please have a look at > >>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug > >>> >deals > >>> >> >with this specific issue. > >>> >> > > >>> >> >rgds > >>> >> >jan I. > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> >> > > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher > >><r.birc...@gmx.ch> > >>> >> >wrote: > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >>> Hello bugreporter > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporte...@hushmail.com: > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks. > >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out > >which > >>> >devs > >>> >> >do not > >>> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove > >>them > >>> >> >from the bugs > >>> >> >>>> "Assigned To:" > >>> >> >>>> field? > >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>> This is a good idea. > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this: > >>> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are > >>assigned > >>> >to > >>> >> >bugs from > >>> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base > >>> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which > >>are > >>> >> >subscribed > >>> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list > >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e- > >>mail > >>> >> >adress on > >>> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my > >>private > >>> >at > >>> >> >the mailing > >>> >> >>> list. > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN > >>> >employee. > >>> >> >If you > >>> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her. > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to > >>reset > >>> >> >"assigned > >>> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. > >Rob > >>> >> >talked about > >>> >> >> doing it at that time. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, > >>than > >>> >to > >>> >> >look after > >>> >> >> the individual names. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> rgds > >>> >> >> jan I. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> Thanks for the work > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> Greetings Raphael > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------- > >- > >>--- > >>> >- > >>> >> >**--------- > >>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- > >>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev- > >>> >> >unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org> > >>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >>> >h...@openoffice.apache.org > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- > >- > >>--- > >>> >---- > >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >>h...@openoffice.apache.org > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> > >>> > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------- > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > i
