QA for 2.6 - help needed

From: Ryan Pavlik <>
Date: Thu Jan 10 2008 - 05:27:19 CET

Hey everybody!

I spent some time tonight poking around and cleaning up some bugs.
We've currently got 405 bugs targeted for 2.6, many of those (at least
of the ones I looked at) targetted toward 2.6 because their previous
target was past. It would be great if folks could take a few minutes
and go through this list, judging whether or not the bug should block
2.6, whether it needs to be fixed during the 2.6.x series, or whether it
is minor enough to put off further.

The real reason this should be done is that we don't want any "big deal"
bugs to slip through the cracks - if you find that there is such a bug,
please mention that in the comments and adjust the triage information
(priority, severity, target) accordingly. When that list is 0, I'd feel
good releasing 2.6.0, because that means somebody has gone through each
one of those bugs, and either saw it was minor and moved it, or saw it
was major, marked as such, it got fixed, and is no longer on the list.

Ideally, a quick check to see if the bug still exists would be great -
there are a lot of bug reports with reproduction instructions that can
be followed to do this. If you re-confirm a bug, don't forget to update
the Version field of the bug report, and specify which version you
used. (If you want to test with a recent Windows build, I recommend my
relatively recent "pre-2.7.0" nightly posted at or build your own)

The link to the 2.6 bug list:

For those who trust me, here's a tinyurl version:

Every little bit helps - keeping our bug database clean is a big task,
but fortunately many parts of the task are small and manageable.

Another useful task, if you really want the extra "Brownie Points" (TM)
is resolution verification: go into Bugzilla, click Search and Advanced
Search, then choose only "status: resolved" and whatever other
qualifications you'd like (perhaps only Windows bugs, or only
import/export bugs, etc) and help cut down on the over 2000 bugs that
have been reported as fixed but with the fix not verified.



Happy QA'ing!

Ryan Pavlik
Received on Thu Jan 10 05:28:11 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 10 2008 - 05:28:11 CET