Thoughts about a better Quality Management process for Plasma

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Monday, January 14, 2013 17:11:31 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Monday 14 January 2013 16:24:28 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > > Whoever is maintainer of a component, should become the
> > > default assignee for bugs in that component. No longer a one address for
> > > all assignee.
> > 
> > i think the maintainer should be added as a default CC, but if each
> > component goes to a single person's inbox, then it means we rely on them
> > to
> > watch it. it also means that when maintainers change, we have to go
> > through
> > and change ownership of tons of bugs .. meh.
> 
> you are lacking knowledge about some bugzilla features :-)

apparently .. seems our b.k.o doesn't suck nearly as much as it used to, and 
that's really great news. thanks for taking the time to enlighten me :)

*ponders for a moment, sipping at his tea, watching the snow fall outside*

after this set of threads settles down, would you be willing to take on 
drafting a semi-formal bug handling strategy that we put on the wiki and try 
to implement for a couple of releases to see how well it works in practice?

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20130115/555328b7/attachment.sig>