Can someone take a look?

[Richard llom]

Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Richard llom wrote:
>> Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Richard llom wrote:
>>>> [...]
>> Ok, how about the reproducible keyword?
> 
> We don't use that, instead the status is set to confirmed, as only
> reproducible bugs are getting that status.
> 
Ah, ok.

>> And regarding the relation of the bugs:
>> I guess a "See also" link cannot harm, also considering the few manpower
>> here ... :-( (this should ease things).
> 
> As I said, that is not up to me to set that, let the maintainers do
> this. Again, you did NOT send this to the correct mailing list, Cc:ing
> them.
> 
This was (IMHO) more a question about the bug handling itself, rather about 
the matter of the bug. So I thought the testing ML would be appropriate?

> In general: the kde-testing mailing list is not for bug reports to the
> individual projects, ...
> 
These mails weren't bug reports nor were they meant as bug reports (I know 
you didn't say so, I just wanted to clarify this. Also regarding the follow-
ups on this thread).
I just wanted to get some deeper insight, like if there are (specific) 
reasons, maybe to get in contact with the dev, etc.

> developers are automatically assigned the bugs correctly. You can
> always send an additional mail to the relevant developer list, ...
> 
You did so with your first reply, so I think this is OK now. Lets see if 
someone responds.

Regards
richard