Kohei Yoshida schrieb: Hi all,
I think I understand Joel's intention. I also have problems to find out whether a bug already is under observation of a developer (because he is in CC), that was more easy in the early time with very few developers. And I believe developers should become involved when all necessary info is in the report. So I also see some advantages (concerning queries) to add a developer to the "Assigned to" field.
But on the other hand, that might discourage volunteers (for EasyHacks and similar), and developers might feel pressed to start work on that particular bug. Most engraving disadvantage of changing the current proceeding is that it is a change of the current proceeding ;-) It always takes long time with lots of discussion until new proceeding will be accepted.
So I agree with Kohei, we should not modify this if we do not have very good reasons with really promising prospects for benefit. Of course, if someone has ideas here, we should discuss that (may be better on qa list?).
And - Thanks to Calc Team for reliably handling the bugzilla dashboard concerning Assignee, Target, ... . This eases our (at least my) work very much.
Best regards Rainer _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: [email protected] Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
