> > If you take the enhancement mentioned in the mail , i dont have any > > clue on how to proceed and that makes it difficult. Probably a note > > atleast on what to be tested could obviously make a difference and > > that atlteast should be mandatory i feel. Ok but for some packages some testers have responded saying "It works for me " some people have told it does not work me " . If you look at these 2 statements, its contradicting, thats point one and the next one is "It" is still undefined for other testers :). My suggestion is why cannot we define "It" as a test case or an enhancement atleast. I sincerely feel that it would make a big difference. Probably we could review our updates system and try adding a field which gives more info.I also strongly feel that it would help our contributors in a real positive way. Cheers, Balaji On 5/29/08, Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu May 29 2008, "G" wrote: > > > If you take the enhancement mentioned in the mail , i dont have any > > clue on how to proceed and that makes it difficult. Probably a note > > atleast on what to be tested could obviously make a difference and > > that atlteast should be mandatory i feel. > > > Often it will be enough just to use the application a little to provide > feedback, e.g. as long as the application does not crash or corrupt some > data, then the update is good enough most of the times imho. > > Regards, > > Till > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
