Hi,
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 11:14:05PM +0700, Korrawit Pruegsanusak wrote:
> And yes, the "we" here is now including you, Joel. :-)
Apropos: If you are able, it would be great if you could join the next QA call
- it will be on 2012-06-12 14:00 UTC. Some things are easier to coordinate on
the
pho
I just realized that there is no CONFIRMED, I think this would be a helpful
classification but if it can't/won't be added then I still feel like we
should differentiate confirmed from non confirmed in some manner.
This could be as simple as making it ASSIGNED TO and have it blank or just
default l
Hello Joel, all,
First, a big thank you from me! :-)
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Joel Madero wrote:
> 2. If two or more people have said that they do not have the bug I'm doing
> the following if there hasn't been action for 30+ days:
> a. If it's stated that the bug was fixed in a recent re
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 07:17:51AM -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
> If someone asked "is this reproducible in the latest release", but didn't
> say anything else as to if they themselves had tried to reproduce it. I
> would mark as NEEDINFO. I think that this is a bad policy as we can't
> expect users t
