Michael Meeks-2 wrote
> On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 10:33 -0700, bfo wrote:
>> This could be done on per project basis. Unfortunately with
> Oh ! if we know that this is easy to turn on on a per product basis
> (ie. a simple bugzilla setting just for our product); then that is
> trivial to get tur
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 10:33 -0700, bfo wrote:
> This could be done on per project basis. Unfortunately with
Oh ! if we know that this is easy to turn on on a per product basis
(ie. a simple bugzilla setting just for our product); then that is
trivial to get turned on.
Can you co
jmadero wrote
> I think that
> recognizing who is QA and who isn't will become an issue.
Hi.
It would be possible to create QA Bugzilla group with special icon and then
add QA people as members. Icon would be displayed along Bugzilla nick then.
See 3.15.1:3 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/docs/en/ht
jmadero wrote
>> My suspicion is that the other freedesktop projects would hate
>> that,
>> and that this is something that we'd need to share with them; making it
>> rather difficult to fix.
Hi.
This could be done on per project basis. Unfortunately with
Michael Meeks wrote
> Generally
It's not an issue to know or not who is QA. You can make a list of QA people
to organize QA events, it can be useful indeed but in any case I don't see
the problem for people whom the role isn't clearly defined.
We mustn't lock access/restrain right/... to casual contributors.
Julien
--
View th
Apologies in advance about not including Julien's message, I'm still not
quite sure how to deal with direct email response vs. nabble response so
here is my response to not needing it.
I agree right now there isn't truly a need but as we grow I think that
recognizing who is QA and who isn't will b
Quite human to think one's problem deserve a lot of attention.
It seems that in most of cases, QA member change bug status with an
explanation and everything is fine.
Last example here:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55026
No need to put extra info on whiteboard if you just look at
What about adding some kind of whiteboard status (I knowmorenot
good), that is like "verified and prioritized by a member of QA", then in
the future when we're cleaning the NEW bugs and prioritizing them we know
when an experienced user has already done the triaging (vs. the user just
tryin
Hi Joel,
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 08:56 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
> I know that this is a touchy subject and needs a lot of discussion
> but, how difficult is it to make it so you need permissions to change
> priority and severity of a bug? My goal is to at least "kind of" deal
> with priorities in t
