Adding Verification HOWTO to bugzilla.gnome.org?

[Eli Goldberg <eli eazel com>]

Dredging back 10 days...

Havoc Pennington wrote:

> Eli Goldberg <eli eazel com> writes:
> >     * I re-open (or find & file related "corner case" bugs) on about 20-25%
> > of fixed Nautilus bugs (!) from verification. Is it possible that many of
> > bugs like these are being lost in GNOME right now because there's no 3rd
> > party verification of the fixes?
> >
>
> I notice that a lot of bugs I thought I fixed for Red Hat end up being
> only partly fixed or unfixed also, so I would concur that verification
> is a very good thing.

[Re: offer to adapt Eazel's Bug Verification tutorial for bugzilla.gnome.org]

>
>
> >     I'd be happy to even do it for you if y'all agree that getting
> > verification started is a good thing for GNOME, but am not familiar with
> > GNOME testing in general (but can certainly get any help needed from Maciej
> > or whomever.)
> >
>
> I do agree that it's a good thing.
>

Does a single 'yes' vote represent a consensus?

If so, I'd be happy to adapt the
<http://nautilus.eazel.com/testing/verifybugs.html> verification tutorial for
GNOME bugs at large, for linking from bugzilla.gnome.org.

See y'all,

Eli


_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers