On Tue, 07 Aug 2001, Daniel Egger wrote: > Am 07 Aug 2001 17:41:40 +0200 schrieb Raphael Quinet: > > [...] it would still be > > good to change the state of some bugs to CLOSED so that we can easily > > check if a bug fix exists only in CVS or if it is part of a release. > > If nobody objects to that, I volunteer for doing this later this week. > > I will go through the bug reports that are FIXED or VERIFIED and move > > them to CLOSED if the fix is part of 1.2.2 (or earlier). > > Let's make it so. > We should also check back the open bugs whether we can reproduce > them with 1.2.2 and bother the bugwriters again if not. Of course > for obvious cases this is not necessary. This way we can move the > bugs up in the versioning and hopefully sort out a few more.
Phew... OK, I went through about 170 bug reports that were marked as FIXED, VERIFIED, UNCONFIRMED or NEEDINFO, I verified some of them if necessary and I changed the state of 125 of them. Most of them are now CLOSED. Note that I did not close those that were marked FIXED DUPLICATE if the duplicate was not closed. Also, several bugs were fixed in CVS HEAD only so they remain FIXED but not CLOSED.
I did not check all bugs that are NEW or ASSIGNED to see if they were still relevant. But I had a quick look at some of them, and they seem to be still valid. Most of them have correct information as well, so the only thing missing is someone who can take the time to fix them.
> In the next time I'll be going to check back all the open queries > for information and check for reproducibility on my 3 testmachines > here (i686 notebook, AMD Duron, PPC notebook) whether I can reproduce > them and close them if not. We need to improve the quality of the > reports a lot to be really helpful; without a good description > and a stacktrace for crashes they are useless so we should urge the > reporters to give us this information.
Yes, certainly. Unfortunately, it looks like about a third of the "external" reporters (who are not involved in the development of the Gimp) submit incomplete bug reports and do not reply to the requests for more information. It's a pity, but I do not expect this to change (in some case, the users are not very familiar with programming and/or with the English language so it is difficult for them to supply more information).
I could be helpful to have more contributors who would look from time to time at the bug reports that are marked UNCONFIRMED or NEEDINFO, and would supply the missing information if they are able to reproduce the bug.
By the way, I am still not on the bugs mailing list (bugs@xxxxxxxx). I would really appreciate if someone could at least tell me who I need to contact, because this is the third time that I try and nothing happens. Please, pretty please, with sugar on top... ;-)
-Raphael
