I'd like to check if maybe I misunderstood our bugzilla handling standards.
I thought we close the bug when the fix is committed in all branches where it should be, and that's what I was doing in the bugs I was fixing. But obviously, if our community standards are the other way round, I'll follow them. I asked because I have now lived several times now that several developers close a bug I'm CCed to as soon as they commit the fix to master. The disadvantage of the latter method is that these bugs appear crossed out in the "most annoying" (and other) lists. Its advantage, maybe, is that it goes away from said developer's list: their job is "finished" so it should get the hell out of their TODO list. I've come to see this last point as not completely obvious, and maybe even wrong: when I commit a fix to master, I regard it as also my job to get it backported to the other branches, so my job on this bug is _not_ finished, so it makes sense for it to linger in my TODO list until the fix is everywhere it should. -- Lionel _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
