Re: [Nautilus-list] [Feedback Request] Tutorial --- How to Verify Nautilus Bugs

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Eli Goldberg <eli eazel com> writes:

> Hey, all ---
> 
>     I threw together a tutorial for the impending Nautilus Quality
> Engineering site, to teach GNOME enthusiasts how to verify Nautilus
> bugs.
> 
>     As many of you know, we're desperately in need of verification help,
> and it's a very easy, non-committal way for interested people to make a
> major difference in the quality of Nautilus in their spare time.
> 
>     If anyone has any feedback before this is posted publically, the
> temporary URL is:
> 
>     <http://www.prometheus-music.com/eazel/nautilusqa-verifybugs.html>
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Eli
> 
> P.S. I'm currently assuming that we don't need to verify
> duplicate/invalid/worksforme bugs right now given the number of
> unverified fixed bugs. If anyone has a strong case for why they should
> be included, I'll gladly include instructions for those, as well.
> 

WORKSFORME should be verified in my opinion - it's sort of the same as
FIXED only you're claiming it was never broken as far as you know.

DUPLICATE likely does not need verification.

And I'm not sure about INVALID because I don't know what that state is
supposed to mean.

 - Maciej