You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by bu...@hushmail.com on 2013/09/08 15:55:11 UTC
bug 107063 (needs update)
Can someone please set the bugs:
26331
20525
as duplicate of:
107063
And change the "Version" of 107063 to 4.0.1.
I tested this on Apache_OpenOffice_4.0.1_Win_x86_install_en-GB.exe on XP and this bug still occurs.
(tested with frames of images and tables)
thx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLL,
I just tried to exclude some assignees like "ooo" but it does not work for me.
When I try to search just for bugs with "ooo" as the assignee I get no bugs.
But there are bugs with this assignee like: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=117726
I tried in "Custom Search" to select "Assignee" and choose "is equal to" and then setting the value to ooo
but it does not work. Using "is equal to any of the strings" instead of "is equal to" doesn not work as well -> ?????
On 25.09.2013 at 12:24 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Sep 25, 2013 11:28 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>> That's what I use now:
>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>
>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>
>congrats that looks very correct and complete to me. Then its just
>manual
>work to unassign.
>
>rgds
>jan
>>
>>
>>
>> On 25.09.2013 at 10:58 AM, bugreporter99@hushmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >>...Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru
>> >Can you tell me how to invoke a bugzilla guru? Or is he already
>> >seeing this and just has too much work to do?
>> >
>> >>I think you need to use "search by change history".
>> >But in "search by change history" one only can search for
>changes
>> >(at least that's what I was thinking).
>> >But I want those issues with no changes.
>> >
>> >
>> >On 24.09.2013 at 7:06 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
>> >>> ...
>> >>> >...if you did the unassignment,
>> >>>
>> >>> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
>> >>> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced
>Search
>> >>on
>> >>> bugzilla and it did not work.
>> >>> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does
>that
>> >>exactly
>> >>> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
>> >>> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search
>without
>> >>beeing
>> >>> logged in):
>> >>> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can
>> >>hopefully
>> >>give you more precise ideas.
>> >>
>> >>"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status.
>> >>Without
>> >>actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by
>> >change
>> >>history".
>> >>
>> >>rgds
>> >>jan I.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Thanks.
>> >>> >> Haven't seen that.
>> >>> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been
>worked
>> >>on
>> >>> >for 6
>> >>> >> month..." means?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in
>the
>> >>> >comments)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Cause for example the bug
>> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was
>> >>reported
>> >>> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was
>> >>from
>> >>> >"mkca
>> >>> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to
>Oliver
>> >>> >Specht on
>> >>> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is
>> >marked
>> >>> >as a
>> >>> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
>> >>> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there
>> >>something
>> >>> >I missed?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified
>and
>> >>> >assigned).
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a
>year
>> >>and
>> >>> >assigned
>> >>> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking.
>The
>> >>> >assigned
>> >>> >person automatically gets a mail about the change.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release"
>> >>issues
>> >>> >assigned
>> >>> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know
>> >it
>> >>is
>> >>> >free to
>> >>> >be worked on.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get
>an
>> >>> >overview of
>> >>> >how many issues are actually being worked on.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >rgds
>> >>> >jan I.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >Please have a look at
>> >>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that
>bug
>> >>> >deals
>> >>> >> >with this specific issue.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >rgds
>> >>> >> >jan I.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher
>> >><r....@gmx.ch>
>> >>> >> >wrote:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>> Hello bugreporter
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>> >>> >> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out
>> >which
>> >>> >devs
>> >>> >> >do not
>> >>> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and
>remove
>> >>them
>> >>> >> >from the bugs
>> >>> >> >>>> "Assigned To:"
>> >>> >> >>>> field?
>> >>> >> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> This is a good idea.
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
>> >>> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are
>> >>assigned
>> >>> >to
>> >>> >> >bugs from
>> >>> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base
>> >>> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses
>which
>> >>are
>> >>> >> >subscribed
>> >>> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list
>> >>> >> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different
>e-
>> >>mail
>> >>> >> >adress on
>> >>> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my
>> >>private
>> >>> >at
>> >>> >> >the mailing
>> >>> >> >>> list.
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
>> >>> >employee.
>> >>> >> >If you
>> >>> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed
>to
>> >>reset
>> >>> >> >"assigned
>> >>> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month.
>> >Rob
>> >>> >> >talked about
>> >>> >> >> doing it at that time.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism,
>> >>than
>> >>> >to
>> >>> >> >look after
>> >>> >> >> the individual names.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> rgds
>> >>> >> >> jan I.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Thanks for the work
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Greetings Raphael
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> ------------------------------**----------------------
>---
>> >-
>> >>---
>> >>> >-
>> >>> >> >**---------
>> >>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>> >>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
>> >>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> >>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>> >>> >help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
>---
>> >-
>> >>---
>> >>> >----
>> >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>> >>help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> >----------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>> >--
>> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>i
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On Sep 25, 2013 11:28 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>
> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
> That's what I use now:
> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>
> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
congrats that looks very correct and complete to me. Then its just manual
work to unassign.
rgds
jan
>
>
>
> On 25.09.2013 at 10:58 AM, bugreporter99@hushmail.com wrote:
> >
> >>...Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru
> >Can you tell me how to invoke a bugzilla guru? Or is he already
> >seeing this and just has too much work to do?
> >
> >>I think you need to use "search by change history".
> >But in "search by change history" one only can search for changes
> >(at least that's what I was thinking).
> >But I want those issues with no changes.
> >
> >
> >On 24.09.2013 at 7:06 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
> >>> ...
> >>> >...if you did the unassignment,
> >>>
> >>> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
> >>> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search
> >>on
> >>> bugzilla and it did not work.
> >>> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that
> >>exactly
> >>> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
> >>> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without
> >>beeing
> >>> logged in):
> >>> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
> >>>
> >>
> >>Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can
> >>hopefully
> >>give you more precise ideas.
> >>
> >>"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status.
> >>Without
> >>actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by
> >change
> >>history".
> >>
> >>rgds
> >>jan I.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Thanks.
> >>> >> Haven't seen that.
> >>> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked
> >>on
> >>> >for 6
> >>> >> month..." means?
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the
> >>> >comments)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> Cause for example the bug
> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was
> >>reported
> >>> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was
> >>from
> >>> >"mkca
> >>> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver
> >>> >Specht on
> >>> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is
> >marked
> >>> >as a
> >>> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
> >>> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there
> >>something
> >>> >I missed?
> >>> >>
> >>> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and
> >>> >assigned).
> >>> >
> >>> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year
> >>and
> >>> >assigned
> >>> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The
> >>> >assigned
> >>> >person automatically gets a mail about the change.
> >>> >
> >>> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release"
> >>issues
> >>> >assigned
> >>> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know
> >it
> >>is
> >>> >free to
> >>> >be worked on.
> >>> >
> >>> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an
> >>> >overview of
> >>> >how many issues are actually being worked on.
> >>> >
> >>> >rgds
> >>> >jan I.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >Please have a look at
> >>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug
> >>> >deals
> >>> >> >with this specific issue.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >rgds
> >>> >> >jan I.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher
> >><r....@gmx.ch>
> >>> >> >wrote:
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>> Hello bugreporter
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out
> >which
> >>> >devs
> >>> >> >do not
> >>> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove
> >>them
> >>> >> >from the bugs
> >>> >> >>>> "Assigned To:"
> >>> >> >>>> field?
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> This is a good idea.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
> >>> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are
> >>assigned
> >>> >to
> >>> >> >bugs from
> >>> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base
> >>> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which
> >>are
> >>> >> >subscribed
> >>> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-
> >>mail
> >>> >> >adress on
> >>> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my
> >>private
> >>> >at
> >>> >> >the mailing
> >>> >> >>> list.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
> >>> >employee.
> >>> >> >If you
> >>> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to
> >>reset
> >>> >> >"assigned
> >>> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month.
> >Rob
> >>> >> >talked about
> >>> >> >> doing it at that time.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism,
> >>than
> >>> >to
> >>> >> >look after
> >>> >> >> the individual names.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> rgds
> >>> >> >> jan I.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Thanks for the work
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Greetings Raphael
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> ------------------------------**-------------------------
> >-
> >>---
> >>> >-
> >>> >> >**---------
> >>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
> >>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
> >>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
> >>> >help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------
> >-
> >>---
> >>> >----
> >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
> >>help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
i
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>That issue is assigned to "ooo@erack.de", so you don't find it
>with a
>search for "is" ooo.
>
>In general BZ allows a "real name" (display name) as well as the
>account ID. For example my ID is "robweir@apache.org", but my
>display name is "Rob Weir". You should be searching for the
>unique
>account ID.
Now it makes sense. Is there a way to find out the account ID of the assignee OR search for the "real name"?
I was thinking that ooo would stand for OpenOffice.org, so the report would be assigned to ALL devs.
What about openoffice and issues? Are they also real user names or general assignee names to tell that the issue is assigned to all devs or a list or something in those lines.
So I guess that "AOO security list" stands for security@openoffice.apache.org ???
On 30.09.2013 at 2:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>Can you point me to an
>>>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
>>
>> I don't get it. When I choose "is" and type ooo in the "Search
>by people" section I also get NULL results.
>> But when I choose contains, I get some reports which are
>assigned to ooo.
>> for example https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=101386
>>
>
>That issue is assigned to "ooo@erack.de", so you don't find it
>with a
>search for "is" ooo.
>
>In general BZ allows a "real name" (display name) as well as the
>account ID. For example my ID is "robweir@apache.org", but my
>display name is "Rob Weir". You should be searching for the
>unique
>account ID.
>
>> What about:
>>>btw. is there a difference between you executing some batch
>operations on the assignee field and me doing that manually?
>>>Won't the amount of emails be the same?
>>>So it does not matter if the assignee-resetting is done manually
>or via a batch command?
>>
>
>Changing a few issues manually is not an issue. Changing a large
>number of issues can be a problem. This usually happens via
>automation since one is unlikely to manually change 10,000 issues
>in a
>short period of time,
>
>Regards,
>
>-Rob
>
>>
>> On 29.09.2013 at 2:57 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:59 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>>>incorrectly
>>>>>showing up in your query?
>>>>
>>>> The problem is not : reports from ooo incorrectly showing up.
>>>> But: reports that should showing up, are not showing up (like
>>>reports from os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg)
>>>> So every report containing "ooo" in the assignee's name get
>>>excluded. (not exclusively ooo, as I'd like to have)
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I'm just telling it the wrong way but what I want to
>>>achieve in my next step is to exlude bugs from the following
>>>assignees:
>>>>
>>>> openoffice
>>>> ooo
>>>> AOO security list
>>>> issues
>>>> security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> and mybe others too (don't know atm)
>>>>
>>>> from all bug reports.
>>>>
>>>> At the moment I'm trying to achieve this for one assignee (ooo)
>>>to prove that my search query will work.
>>>>
>>>> Still don't get why there are no bug reports showing up when
>>>using the following things in the custom search:
>>>> Assignee is equal to ooo
>>>>
>>>
>>>I see the same thing. Why is this wrong? Isn't the most
>natural
>>>explaination that there are no such bugs? Can you point me to
>an
>>>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
>>>
>>>-Rob
>>>
>>>> Is this a feature to prevent people from pasting sql code or
>>>such things into the field???
>>>> Or is this a BZ bug?
>>>> Or am I just missing something here?
>>>>
>>>> On 29.09.2013 at 12:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user
>with
>>>ID
>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with
>>>"ooo"
>>>>>>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the
>>>>>end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing
>else
>>>>>like os_ooo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an
>advanced
>>>>>>>query of:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo,
>>>issues,
>>>>>>>AOO
>>>>>>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are
>>>>>also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other
>>>>>like openoffice...).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as
>with
>>>>>the
>>>>>>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I
>>>also
>>>>>tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
>>>>>> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that
>I
>>>>>might have missed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>>>incorrectly
>>>>>showing up in your query?
>>>>>
>>>>>-Rob
>>>>
>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>----
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>Can you point me to an
>>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
>
> I don't get it. When I choose "is" and type ooo in the "Search by people" section I also get NULL results.
> But when I choose contains, I get some reports which are assigned to ooo.
> for example https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=101386
>
That issue is assigned to "ooo@erack.de", so you don't find it with a
search for "is" ooo.
In general BZ allows a "real name" (display name) as well as the
account ID. For example my ID is "robweir@apache.org", but my
display name is "Rob Weir". You should be searching for the unique
account ID.
> What about:
>>btw. is there a difference between you executing some batch operations on the assignee field and me doing that manually?
>>Won't the amount of emails be the same?
>>So it does not matter if the assignee-resetting is done manually or via a batch command?
>
Changing a few issues manually is not an issue. Changing a large
number of issues can be a problem. This usually happens via
automation since one is unlikely to manually change 10,000 issues in a
short period of time,
Regards,
-Rob
>
> On 29.09.2013 at 2:57 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:59 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>>incorrectly
>>>>showing up in your query?
>>>
>>> The problem is not : reports from ooo incorrectly showing up.
>>> But: reports that should showing up, are not showing up (like
>>reports from os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg)
>>> So every report containing "ooo" in the assignee's name get
>>excluded. (not exclusively ooo, as I'd like to have)
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm just telling it the wrong way but what I want to
>>achieve in my next step is to exlude bugs from the following
>>assignees:
>>>
>>> openoffice
>>> ooo
>>> AOO security list
>>> issues
>>> security@openoffice.apache.org
>>> and mybe others too (don't know atm)
>>>
>>> from all bug reports.
>>>
>>> At the moment I'm trying to achieve this for one assignee (ooo)
>>to prove that my search query will work.
>>>
>>> Still don't get why there are no bug reports showing up when
>>using the following things in the custom search:
>>> Assignee is equal to ooo
>>>
>>
>>I see the same thing. Why is this wrong? Isn't the most natural
>>explaination that there are no such bugs? Can you point me to an
>>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
>>
>>-Rob
>>
>>> Is this a feature to prevent people from pasting sql code or
>>such things into the field???
>>> Or is this a BZ bug?
>>> Or am I just missing something here?
>>>
>>> On 29.09.2013 at 12:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with
>>ID
>>>>>>that
>>>>>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with
>>"ooo"
>>>>>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the
>>>>end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else
>>>>like os_ooo.
>>>>>
>>>>>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>>>>>query of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo,
>>issues,
>>>>>>AOO
>>>>>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are
>>>>also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other
>>>>like openoffice...).
>>>>>
>>>>>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with
>>>>the
>>>>>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>>>>
>>>>> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I
>>also
>>>>tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
>>>>> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I
>>>>might have missed?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>>incorrectly
>>>>showing up in your query?
>>>>
>>>>-Rob
>>>
>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>----
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>Can you point me to an
>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
I don't get it. When I choose "is" and type ooo in the "Search by people" section I also get NULL results.
But when I choose contains, I get some reports which are assigned to ooo.
for example https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=101386
What about:
>btw. is there a difference between you executing some batch operations on the assignee field and me doing that manually?
>Won't the amount of emails be the same?
>So it does not matter if the assignee-resetting is done manually or via a batch command?
On 29.09.2013 at 2:57 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:59 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>incorrectly
>>>showing up in your query?
>>
>> The problem is not : reports from ooo incorrectly showing up.
>> But: reports that should showing up, are not showing up (like
>reports from os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg)
>> So every report containing "ooo" in the assignee's name get
>excluded. (not exclusively ooo, as I'd like to have)
>>
>> Maybe I'm just telling it the wrong way but what I want to
>achieve in my next step is to exlude bugs from the following
>assignees:
>>
>> openoffice
>> ooo
>> AOO security list
>> issues
>> security@openoffice.apache.org
>> and mybe others too (don't know atm)
>>
>> from all bug reports.
>>
>> At the moment I'm trying to achieve this for one assignee (ooo)
>to prove that my search query will work.
>>
>> Still don't get why there are no bug reports showing up when
>using the following things in the custom search:
>> Assignee is equal to ooo
>>
>
>I see the same thing. Why is this wrong? Isn't the most natural
>explaination that there are no such bugs? Can you point me to an
>issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
>
>-Rob
>
>> Is this a feature to prevent people from pasting sql code or
>such things into the field???
>> Or is this a BZ bug?
>> Or am I just missing something here?
>>
>> On 29.09.2013 at 12:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with
>ID
>>>>>that
>>>>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with
>"ooo"
>>>>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>>>
>>>> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the
>>>end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else
>>>like os_ooo.
>>>>
>>>>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>>>>query of:
>>>>>
>>>>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo,
>issues,
>>>>>AOO
>>>>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are
>>>also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other
>>>like openoffice...).
>>>>
>>>>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with
>>>the
>>>>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>>>
>>>> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I
>also
>>>tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
>>>> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I
>>>might have missed?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>>incorrectly
>>>showing up in your query?
>>>
>>>-Rob
>>
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:59 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>incorrectly
>>showing up in your query?
>
> The problem is not : reports from ooo incorrectly showing up.
> But: reports that should showing up, are not showing up (like reports from os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg)
> So every report containing "ooo" in the assignee's name get excluded. (not exclusively ooo, as I'd like to have)
>
> Maybe I'm just telling it the wrong way but what I want to achieve in my next step is to exlude bugs from the following assignees:
>
> openoffice
> ooo
> AOO security list
> issues
> security@openoffice.apache.org
> and mybe others too (don't know atm)
>
> from all bug reports.
>
> At the moment I'm trying to achieve this for one assignee (ooo) to prove that my search query will work.
>
> Still don't get why there are no bug reports showing up when using the following things in the custom search:
> Assignee is equal to ooo
>
I see the same thing. Why is this wrong? Isn't the most natural
explaination that there are no such bugs? Can you point me to an
issue where the Assignee field is equal to "ooo"?
-Rob
> Is this a feature to prevent people from pasting sql code or such things into the field???
> Or is this a BZ bug?
> Or am I just missing something here?
>
> On 29.09.2013 at 12:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>>>>that
>>>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>>>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>>
>>> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the
>>end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else
>>like os_ooo.
>>>
>>>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>>>query of:
>>>>
>>>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>>>>AOO
>>>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are
>>also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other
>>like openoffice...).
>>>
>>>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with
>>the
>>>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>>
>>> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I also
>>tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
>>> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I
>>might have missed?
>>>
>>
>>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>>incorrectly
>>showing up in your query?
>>
>>-Rob
>
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>incorrectly
>showing up in your query?
The problem is not : reports from ooo incorrectly showing up.
But: reports that should showing up, are not showing up (like reports from os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg)
So every report containing "ooo" in the assignee's name get excluded. (not exclusively ooo, as I'd like to have)
Maybe I'm just telling it the wrong way but what I want to achieve in my next step is to exlude bugs from the following assignees:
openoffice
ooo
AOO security list
issues
security@openoffice.apache.org
and mybe others too (don't know atm)
from all bug reports.
At the moment I'm trying to achieve this for one assignee (ooo) to prove that my search query will work.
Still don't get why there are no bug reports showing up when using the following things in the custom search:
Assignee is equal to ooo
Is this a feature to prevent people from pasting sql code or such things into the field???
Or is this a BZ bug?
Or am I just missing something here?
On 29.09.2013 at 12:12 AM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>>>that
>>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>
>> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the
>end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else
>like os_ooo.
>>
>>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>>query of:
>>>
>>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>>>AOO
>>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are
>also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other
>like openoffice...).
>>
>>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with
>the
>>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>
>> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I also
>tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
>> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I
>might have missed?
>>
>
>Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is
>incorrectly
>showing up in your query?
>
>-Rob
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
btw. is there a difference between you executing some batch operations on the assignee field and me doing that manually?
Won't the amount of emails be the same?
So it does not matter if the assignee-resetting is done manually or via a batch command?
thx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>>that
>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>>followed immediately by a line end.
>
> I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else like os_ooo.
>
>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>query of:
>>
>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>>AOO
>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>
> The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other like openoffice...).
>
>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with the
>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>
> So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I also tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
> Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I might have missed?
>
Can you give a link to a defect report from "ooo" that is incorrectly
showing up in your query?
-Rob
> thx
>
> On 27.09.2013 at 4:29 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 9:39 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>>>groups
>>>
>>> The problem is, in the final step (atm I'm just tinkering) I
>>want to exclude more than three assignees from the search.
>>> some of the assignees I'd like to exclude:
>>> openoffice
>>> ooo
>>> "AOO security list"
>>> issues
>>> security@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>>
>>> Using ^ooo$ and "matches regular expression" does not work for
>>me.
>>>
>>
>>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>>that
>>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>>followed immediately by a line end.
>>
>>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>>query of:
>>
>>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>>AOO
>>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>> Can you tell what "is equal to" can be used for? (only int,
>>double, ...?)
>>>
>>
>>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with the
>>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>-Rob
>>
>>>>you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>>>extra
>>>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>>>
>>> I see.
>>>
>>> thx
>>>
>>> On 26.09.2013 at 11:47 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:50 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>>>>greater than"
>>>>> Did not see that thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>>>changed in more than 2000 days.
>>>>>
>>>>> Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before
>>>>today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
>>>>> Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue
>>>>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not
>>reset?
>>>>> Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-
>>06-
>>>>17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I used the "time since assignee touched" field. It looks like in
>>>>this
>>>>case the assignee changed his email address. I don't know if
>>that
>>>>impacted the query strategy. But you can find all the issues
>>that
>>>>I
>>>>did reset by searching for the comment string "Reset assignee on
>>>>issues not touched by assignee in more than 2000 days."
>>>>
>>>>> Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
>>>>> I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
>>>>> When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom
>>>>Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
>>>>> the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of
>>the
>>>>strings" instead of "is equal to" does
>>>>> not work as well -> ?????
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>>>groups
>>>>there is already set up to search for assignee. One of the
>>search
>>>>options is for "contains", so you can then just enter "ooo".
>>>>
>>>>> Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not
>>>>work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>>>
>>>>>>We all know who is active and who isn't.
>>>>> Did not know that.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only
>>assignees.
>>>>>
>>>>> What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and
>>then
>>>>reset all the assignee fields?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It would not be pretty. It would trigger notifications to be
>>>>emailed
>>>>to the old assignee, but also everyone that commented on the
>>issue
>>>>previously, or added themselves to cc. So a rough guess, for N
>>>>old
>>>>issues you would generate 4x email notifications. Doing this
>>for
>>>>a
>>>>handful, 10 or 20 issues is fine. But not for thousands. If you
>>>>do
>>>>this you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>>>extra
>>>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>-Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> thx
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org>
>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
>>>>>><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>>>>>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>>>>>>> That's what I use now:
>>>>>>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>>>greater than"
>>>>>>> "900d".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example,
>>with
>>>>>>>900d I get
>>>>>>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <=
>>100000 I
>>>>>>get 70 bugs,
>>>>>>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives
>>perhaps
>>>>>>about 8000
>>>>>>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long,
>>that
>>>>I
>>>>>>have not
>>>>>>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can
>>>>use
>>>>>>more
>>>>>>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>>>>>>default. But
>>>>>>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>>>>>>suppressed. I
>>>>>>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the
>>>>assignees.
>>>>>>So please
>>>>>>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read
>>>>this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only
>>assignees.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>>>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>>>>>>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to
>>>>defunct
>>>>>>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email
>>>>addresses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not
>>sure
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active
>>>>developer
>>>>>>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to
>>someone
>>>>>>else
>>>>>>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who
>>>>isn't.
>>>>>>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only
>>had
>>>>>>currently active developers make self-assignments, this
>>>>information
>>>>>>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone
>>wants
>>>>to
>>>>>>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis,
>>>>the
>>>>>>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Things that need constant reminding:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>>>>>>closed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>>>>>>from
>>>>>>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the
>>>>issue
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but
>>>>are
>>>>>>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>>>>>>
>>>>>>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be
>>tested
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of
>>>>these
>>>>>>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>>>>>>take
>>>>>>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>>>>>>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>>>>>>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>>>>>>requires
>>>>>>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help
>>get
>>>>>>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-Rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>>>--
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>>>----
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>>>--
>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>----
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>that
>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>followed immediately by a line end.
I was trying to use ^ as a beginning of a string and $ as the end of a string. To tell BZ that I just want ooo and nothing else like os_ooo.
>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>query of:
>
>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>AOO
>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
The problem here is that os_ooo, mst.ooo and wuyan.ooorg are also excluded but I only want to exclude ooo (besides the other like openoffice...).
>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with the
>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
So why does it not work when I just use ooo as the value? I also tried using "ooo" and 'ooo' but that did not work either.
Is there a special way to tell BZ that ooo is a string, that I might have missed?
thx
On 27.09.2013 at 4:29 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 9:39 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>>groups
>>
>> The problem is, in the final step (atm I'm just tinkering) I
>want to exclude more than three assignees from the search.
>> some of the assignees I'd like to exclude:
>> openoffice
>> ooo
>> "AOO security list"
>> issues
>> security@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>
>> Using ^ooo$ and "matches regular expression" does not work for
>me.
>>
>
>What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID
>that
>matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
>followed immediately by a line end.
>
>A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced
>query of:
>
>Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues,
>AOO
>security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
>
>> Can you tell what "is equal to" can be used for? (only int,
>double, ...?)
>>
>
>It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with the
>assignee field, it is a string comparison.
>
>Regards,
>
>-Rob
>
>>>you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>>extra
>>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>>
>> I see.
>>
>> thx
>>
>> On 26.09.2013 at 11:47 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:50 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>>>greater than"
>>>> Did not see that thanks.
>>>>
>>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>>changed in more than 2000 days.
>>>>
>>>> Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before
>>>today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
>>>> Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue
>>>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not
>reset?
>>>> Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-
>06-
>>>17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
>>>>
>>>
>>>I used the "time since assignee touched" field. It looks like in
>>>this
>>>case the assignee changed his email address. I don't know if
>that
>>>impacted the query strategy. But you can find all the issues
>that
>>>I
>>>did reset by searching for the comment string "Reset assignee on
>>>issues not touched by assignee in more than 2000 days."
>>>
>>>> Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
>>>> I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
>>>> When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom
>>>Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
>>>> the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of
>the
>>>strings" instead of "is equal to" does
>>>> not work as well -> ?????
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>>groups
>>>there is already set up to search for assignee. One of the
>search
>>>options is for "contains", so you can then just enter "ooo".
>>>
>>>> Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not
>>>work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>>>>
>>>
>>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>>
>>>>>We all know who is active and who isn't.
>>>> Did not know that.
>>>>
>>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only
>assignees.
>>>>
>>>> What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and
>then
>>>reset all the assignee fields?
>>>>
>>>
>>>It would not be pretty. It would trigger notifications to be
>>>emailed
>>>to the old assignee, but also everyone that commented on the
>issue
>>>previously, or added themselves to cc. So a rough guess, for N
>>>old
>>>issues you would generate 4x email notifications. Doing this
>for
>>>a
>>>handful, 10 or 20 issues is fine. But not for thousands. If you
>>>do
>>>this you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>>extra
>>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>-Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>> thx
>>>>
>>>> [1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
>>>>
>>>> On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
>>>>><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>>>>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>>>>>> That's what I use now:
>>>>>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>>greater than"
>>>>>> "900d".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example,
>with
>>>>>>900d I get
>>>>>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <=
>100000 I
>>>>>get 70 bugs,
>>>>>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives
>perhaps
>>>>>about 8000
>>>>>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long,
>that
>>>I
>>>>>have not
>>>>>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can
>>>use
>>>>>more
>>>>>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>>>>>default. But
>>>>>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>>>>>suppressed. I
>>>>>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the
>>>assignees.
>>>>>So please
>>>>>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read
>>>this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only
>assignees.
>>>>>
>>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>>>>>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to
>>>defunct
>>>>>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email
>>>addresses.
>>>>>
>>>>>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not
>sure
>>>>>it
>>>>>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active
>>>developer
>>>>>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to
>someone
>>>>>else
>>>>>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who
>>>isn't.
>>>>>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only
>had
>>>>>currently active developers make self-assignments, this
>>>information
>>>>>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone
>wants
>>>to
>>>>>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis,
>>>the
>>>>>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>>>>>
>>>>>Things that need constant reminding:
>>>>>
>>>>>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>>>>>closed
>>>>>
>>>>>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>>>>>from
>>>>>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the
>>>issue
>>>>>
>>>>>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but
>>>are
>>>>>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>>>>>
>>>>>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be
>tested
>>>>>and
>>>>>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of
>>>these
>>>>>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>>>>>take
>>>>>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>>>>>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>>>>>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>>>>>requires
>>>>>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help
>get
>>>>>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>-Rob
>>>>>
>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>--
>>>>>--
>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>----
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 9:39 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>groups
>
> The problem is, in the final step (atm I'm just tinkering) I want to exclude more than three assignees from the search.
> some of the assignees I'd like to exclude:
> openoffice
> ooo
> "AOO security list"
> issues
> security@openoffice.apache.org
>
>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>
> Using ^ooo$ and "matches regular expression" does not work for me.
>
What exactly are you looking for? We don't have any user with ID that
matches that regular expression, e.g., a line starting with "ooo"
followed immediately by a line end.
A simpler way to describe this query might be to do an advanced query of:
Assignee: (contains none of the strings) openoffice, ooo, issues, AOO
security list, security@openoffice.apache.org
> Can you tell what "is equal to" can be used for? (only int, double, ...?)
>
It depends on the field type. But in most cases, such as with the
assignee field, it is a string comparison.
Regards,
-Rob
>>you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>extra
>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>
> I see.
>
> thx
>
> On 26.09.2013 at 11:47 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:50 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>>greater than"
>>> Did not see that thanks.
>>>
>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>changed in more than 2000 days.
>>>
>>> Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before
>>today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
>>> Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue
>>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not reset?
>>> Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-06-
>>17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
>>>
>>
>>I used the "time since assignee touched" field. It looks like in
>>this
>>case the assignee changed his email address. I don't know if that
>>impacted the query strategy. But you can find all the issues that
>>I
>>did reset by searching for the comment string "Reset assignee on
>>issues not touched by assignee in more than 2000 days."
>>
>>> Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
>>> I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
>>> When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom
>>Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
>>> the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of the
>>strings" instead of "is equal to" does
>>> not work as well -> ?????
>>>
>>
>>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>>groups
>>there is already set up to search for assignee. One of the search
>>options is for "contains", so you can then just enter "ooo".
>>
>>> Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not
>>work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>>>
>>
>>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>
>>>>We all know who is active and who isn't.
>>> Did not know that.
>>>
>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>>>
>>> What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and then
>>reset all the assignee fields?
>>>
>>
>>It would not be pretty. It would trigger notifications to be
>>emailed
>>to the old assignee, but also everyone that commented on the issue
>>previously, or added themselves to cc. So a rough guess, for N
>>old
>>issues you would generate 4x email notifications. Doing this for
>>a
>>handful, 10 or 20 issues is fine. But not for thousands. If you
>>do
>>this you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>>extra
>>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>-Rob
>>
>>
>>> thx
>>>
>>> [1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
>>>
>>> On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
>>>><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>>>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>>>>> That's what I use now:
>>>>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>greater than"
>>>>> "900d".
>>>>>
>>>>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with
>>>>>900d I get
>>>>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I
>>>>get 70 bugs,
>>>>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps
>>>>about 8000
>>>>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long, that
>>I
>>>>have not
>>>>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can
>>use
>>>>more
>>>>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>>>>
>>>>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>>>>default. But
>>>>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>>>>suppressed. I
>>>>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the
>>assignees.
>>>>So please
>>>>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read
>>this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>>>>
>>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>>>>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to
>>defunct
>>>>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email
>>addresses.
>>>>
>>>>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not sure
>>>>it
>>>>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active
>>developer
>>>>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to someone
>>>>else
>>>>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who
>>isn't.
>>>>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only had
>>>>currently active developers make self-assignments, this
>>information
>>>>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone wants
>>to
>>>>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis,
>>the
>>>>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>>>>
>>>>Things that need constant reminding:
>>>>
>>>>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>>>>closed
>>>>
>>>>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>>>>from
>>>>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the
>>issue
>>>>
>>>>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but
>>are
>>>>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>>>>
>>>>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be tested
>>>>and
>>>>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>>>>
>>>>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of
>>these
>>>>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>>>>take
>>>>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>>>>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>>>>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>>>>requires
>>>>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help get
>>>>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>-Rob
>>>>
>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>>>--
>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>----
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>groups
The problem is, in the final step (atm I'm just tinkering) I want to exclude more than three assignees from the search.
some of the assignees I'd like to exclude:
openoffice
ooo
"AOO security list"
issues
security@openoffice.apache.org
>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
Using ^ooo$ and "matches regular expression" does not work for me.
Can you tell what "is equal to" can be used for? (only int, double, ...?)
>you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>extra
>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
I see.
thx
On 26.09.2013 at 11:47 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:50 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>>greater than"
>> Did not see that thanks.
>>
>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>changed in more than 2000 days.
>>
>> Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before
>today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
>> Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue
>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not reset?
>> Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-06-
>17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
>>
>
>I used the "time since assignee touched" field. It looks like in
>this
>case the assignee changed his email address. I don't know if that
>impacted the query strategy. But you can find all the issues that
>I
>did reset by searching for the comment string "Reset assignee on
>issues not touched by assignee in more than 2000 days."
>
>> Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
>> I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
>> When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom
>Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
>> the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of the
>strings" instead of "is equal to" does
>> not work as well -> ?????
>>
>
>I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three
>groups
>there is already set up to search for assignee. One of the search
>options is for "contains", so you can then just enter "ooo".
>
>> Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not
>work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>>
>
>If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
>"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>
>>>We all know who is active and who isn't.
>> Did not know that.
>>
>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>>
>> What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and then
>reset all the assignee fields?
>>
>
>It would not be pretty. It would trigger notifications to be
>emailed
>to the old assignee, but also everyone that commented on the issue
>previously, or added themselves to cc. So a rough guess, for N
>old
>issues you would generate 4x email notifications. Doing this for
>a
>handful, 10 or 20 issues is fine. But not for thousands. If you
>do
>this you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the
>extra
>work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
>
>Regards,
>
>-Rob
>
>
>> thx
>>
>> [1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
>>
>> On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
>>><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>>>> That's what I use now:
>>>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>greater than"
>>>> "900d".
>>>>
>>>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>>>
>>>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with
>>>>900d I get
>>>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I
>>>get 70 bugs,
>>>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps
>>>about 8000
>>>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long, that
>I
>>>have not
>>>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can
>use
>>>more
>>>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>>>
>>>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>>>default. But
>>>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>>>suppressed. I
>>>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the
>assignees.
>>>So please
>>>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read
>this.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>>>
>>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>>>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to
>defunct
>>>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email
>addresses.
>>>
>>>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not sure
>>>it
>>>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active
>developer
>>>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to someone
>>>else
>>>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who
>isn't.
>>>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only had
>>>currently active developers make self-assignments, this
>information
>>>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone wants
>to
>>>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis,
>the
>>>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>>>
>>>Things that need constant reminding:
>>>
>>>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>>>closed
>>>
>>>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>>>from
>>>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the
>issue
>>>
>>>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but
>are
>>>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>>>
>>>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be tested
>>>and
>>>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>>>
>>>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of
>these
>>>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>>>take
>>>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>>>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>>>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>>>requires
>>>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help get
>>>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>-Rob
>>>
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:50 PM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>>greater than"
> Did not see that thanks.
>
>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>changed in more than 2000 days.
>
> Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
> Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not reset?
> Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-06-17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
>
I used the "time since assignee touched" field. It looks like in this
case the assignee changed his email address. I don't know if that
impacted the query strategy. But you can find all the issues that I
did reset by searching for the comment string "Reset assignee on
issues not touched by assignee in more than 2000 days."
> Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
> I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
> When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
> the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of the strings" instead of "is equal to" does
> not work as well -> ?????
>
I'd use the "Search by People" section. The first of the three groups
there is already set up to search for assignee. One of the search
options is for "contains", so you can then just enter "ooo".
> Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>
If you use the advanced search options then you need to select
"matches regular expression" rather than "is equal to".
>>We all know who is active and who isn't.
> Did not know that.
>
>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>
> What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and then reset all the assignee fields?
>
It would not be pretty. It would trigger notifications to be emailed
to the old assignee, but also everyone that commented on the issue
previously, or added themselves to cc. So a rough guess, for N old
issues you would generate 4x email notifications. Doing this for a
handful, 10 or 20 issues is fine. But not for thousands. If you do
this you will end up owing Scotch to Apache Infra admins for the extra
work they have to do to clean up the mess ;-)
Regards,
-Rob
> thx
>
> [1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
>
> On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
>><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>>> That's what I use now:
>>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>>
>>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>greater than"
>>> "900d".
>>>
>>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>>
>>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with
>>>900d I get
>>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I
>>get 70 bugs,
>>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps
>>about 8000
>>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long, that I
>>have not
>>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can use
>>more
>>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>>
>>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>>default. But
>>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>>suppressed. I
>>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the assignees.
>>So please
>>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read this.
>>>
>>
>>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>>
>>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to defunct
>>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email addresses.
>>
>>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not sure
>>it
>>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active developer
>>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to someone
>>else
>>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who isn't.
>>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only had
>>currently active developers make self-assignments, this information
>>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone wants to
>>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis, the
>>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>>
>>Things that need constant reminding:
>>
>>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>>closed
>>
>>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>>from
>>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the issue
>>
>>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but are
>>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>>
>>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be tested
>>and
>>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>>
>>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of these
>>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>>take
>>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>>requires
>>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help get
>>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>-Rob
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>>greater than"
Did not see that thanks.
>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>changed in more than 2000 days.
Today is September 26, 2013 so that means that 2000 days before today would be April 5, 2008. [1]
Can you please tell me why the assignee of the issue https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was not reset?
Cause when looking at the History there is nothing after 2004-06-17 15:00:01 UTC (besides a comment on 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC ).
Can you please tell me how to find bugs of a certain assignee?
I want to get all bugs listed which are from the assignee ooo .
When (in the Advanced Search) I select "Assignee" in "Custom Search" and choose "is equal to" and then set
the value to ooo it does not work. Using "is equal to any of the strings" instead of "is equal to" does
not work as well -> ?????
Trying to use regular expression and typing ^ooo$ does also not work. (^ooo works but then I get also things like ooo*)
>We all know who is active and who isn't.
Did not know that.
>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
What would happen if you leave the notification enabled and then reset all the assignee fields?
thx
[1]http://www.convertunits.com/dates/daysfromnow/-2000
On 26.09.2013 at 3:39 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
><rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>>
>>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>>> That's what I use now:
>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>>
>>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>>
>>
>> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is
>greater than"
>> "900d".
>>
>> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>>
>> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with
>>900d I get
>> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I
>get 70 bugs,
>> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps
>about 8000
>> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long, that I
>have not
>> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can use
>more
>> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>>
>> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new
>default. But
>> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
>suppressed. I
>> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the assignees.
>So please
>> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read this.
>>
>
>Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
>notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
>notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
>
>Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
>changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
>action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to defunct
>openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email addresses.
>
>There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not sure
>it
>really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active developer
>will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to someone
>else
>who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who isn't.
>And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only had
>currently active developers make self-assignments, this information
>would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone wants to
>monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis, the
>database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
>
>Things that need constant reminding:
>
>1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or
>closed
>
>2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information
>from
>the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the issue
>
>3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but are
>not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
>
>4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be tested
>and
>marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
>
>As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of these
>items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to
>take
>the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
>reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
>There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it
>requires
>some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help get
>someone started on this if anyone is interested.
>
>Regards,
>
>-Rob
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Regina Henschel
<rb...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
>
>> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
>> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
>> That's what I use now:
>> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>>
>> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>>
>
> You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is greater than"
> "900d".
>
> Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
>
> Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with >900d I get
> 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I get 70 bugs,
> which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps about 8000
> matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long, that I have not
> wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base can use more
> efficient search statements than using the UI.
>
> I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new default. But
> such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are suppressed. I
> don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the assignees. So please
> wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change to read this.
>
Notifications are all-or-nothing. A BZ admin can disable all
notifications, run a batch operation, and then re-enable
notifications. But we have no easy way to notify only assignees.
Back in July I reset the assignment for all issues that had not
changed in more than 2000 days. 543 issues were reset in that
action. I've also done other resets for issues assigned to defunct
openoffice.org, novell.com, sun.com and oracle.com email addresses.
There may be others that could be reset as well, but I'm not sure it
really helps anything. As a practical matter, no active developer
will avoid fixing an issue just because it is assigned to someone else
who is not longer active. We all know who is active and who isn't.
And even if we did reset everything to the default, and only had
currently active developers make self-assignments, this information
would be out of date again within a year. Unless someone wants to
monitor and remind developers and testers on an ongoing basis, the
database reverts to its natural chaotic state.
Things that need constant reminding:
1) Unconfirmed issues need to be tested and either confirmed or closed
2) Unconfirmed issues where we are waiting for more information from
the user -- if the user does not respond we need to close the issue
3) Issues that are targetted to be fixed in a given release but are
not -- these need to have their target set back to the default
4) Issues that are marked as fixed in a release need to be tested and
marked as resolved if they are actually fixed.
As a BZ Admin I can help get us to a "clean slate" on some of these
items, but we really need someone (or a group of volunteers) to take
the lead on maintaining the quality of the BZ issues by
reminding/nagging the rest of us to keep our issues up to date.
There are a lot of report and charting options in BZ, but it requires
some knowledge to make the most of them. I'm happy to help get
someone started on this if anyone is interested.
Regards,
-Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.
Hi,
bugreporter99@hushmail.com schrieb:
> Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
> Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
> That's what I use now:
> http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
>
> Are there other assignees we should exclude?
>
You can use the criterion "Time Since Assignee Touched" "is greater
than" "900d".
Exclude assignee security@openoffice.apache.org from search.
Have you count, how many issues are affected? For example, with >900d I
get 322 bugs. With >360d and restriction to 99000<BugID <= 100000 I get
70 bugs, which is 7%. So expand to more than 120000 issues gives perhaps
about 8000 matches. Other complex queries I have tried need so long,
that I have not wait. I guess, that a direct SQL search in the data base
can use more efficient search statements than using the UI.
I like, that former, inactive assignees are reset to the new default.
But such bulk change needs, that the general notifications are
suppressed. I don't know, whether it is possible to only inform the
assignees. So please wait till it is morning for Rob and he has a change
to read this.
Kind regards
Regina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
Stop! Don't invoke the bugzilla guru.
Looks like I made it. Will invastigate farther.
That's what I use now:
http://img18.imageshack.us/i/vk57.png/
Are there other assignees we should exclude?
On 25.09.2013 at 10:58 AM, bugreporter99@hushmail.com wrote:
>
>>...Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru
>Can you tell me how to invoke a bugzilla guru? Or is he already
>seeing this and just has too much work to do?
>
>>I think you need to use "search by change history".
>But in "search by change history" one only can search for changes
>(at least that's what I was thinking).
>But I want those issues with no changes.
>
>
>On 24.09.2013 at 7:06 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
>>> ...
>>> >...if you did the unassignment,
>>>
>>> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
>>> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search
>>on
>>> bugzilla and it did not work.
>>> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that
>>exactly
>>> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
>>> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without
>>beeing
>>> logged in):
>>> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
>>>
>>
>>Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can
>>hopefully
>>give you more precise ideas.
>>
>>"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status.
>>Without
>>actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by
>change
>>history".
>>
>>rgds
>>jan I.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Thanks.
>>> >> Haven't seen that.
>>> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked
>>on
>>> >for 6
>>> >> month..." means?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the
>>> >comments)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Cause for example the bug
>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was
>>reported
>>> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was
>>from
>>> >"mkca
>>> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver
>>> >Specht on
>>> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is
>marked
>>> >as a
>>> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
>>> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there
>>something
>>> >I missed?
>>> >>
>>> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and
>>> >assigned).
>>> >
>>> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year
>>and
>>> >assigned
>>> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The
>>> >assigned
>>> >person automatically gets a mail about the change.
>>> >
>>> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release"
>>issues
>>> >assigned
>>> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know
>it
>>is
>>> >free to
>>> >be worked on.
>>> >
>>> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an
>>> >overview of
>>> >how many issues are actually being worked on.
>>> >
>>> >rgds
>>> >jan I.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Please have a look at
>>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug
>>> >deals
>>> >> >with this specific issue.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >rgds
>>> >> >jan I.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher
>><r....@gmx.ch>
>>> >> >wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> Hello bugreporter
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out
>which
>>> >devs
>>> >> >do not
>>> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove
>>them
>>> >> >from the bugs
>>> >> >>>> "Assigned To:"
>>> >> >>>> field?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>> This is a good idea.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
>>> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are
>>assigned
>>> >to
>>> >> >bugs from
>>> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base
>>> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which
>>are
>>> >> >subscribed
>>> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-
>>mail
>>> >> >adress on
>>> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my
>>private
>>> >at
>>> >> >the mailing
>>> >> >>> list.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
>>> >employee.
>>> >> >If you
>>> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to
>>reset
>>> >> >"assigned
>>> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month.
>Rob
>>> >> >talked about
>>> >> >> doing it at that time.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism,
>>than
>>> >to
>>> >> >look after
>>> >> >> the individual names.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> rgds
>>> >> >> jan I.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Thanks for the work
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Greetings Raphael
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> ------------------------------**-------------------------
>-
>>---
>>> >-
>>> >> >**---------
>>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
>>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>>> >help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------
>-
>>---
>>> >----
>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>>help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>...Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru
Can you tell me how to invoke a bugzilla guru? Or is he already seeing this and just has too much work to do?
>I think you need to use "search by change history".
But in "search by change history" one only can search for changes (at least that's what I was thinking).
But I want those issues with no changes.
On 24.09.2013 at 7:06 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
>> ...
>> >...if you did the unassignment,
>>
>> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
>> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search
>on
>> bugzilla and it did not work.
>> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that
>exactly
>> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
>> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without
>beeing
>> logged in):
>> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
>>
>
>Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can
>hopefully
>give you more precise ideas.
>
>"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status.
>Without
>actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by change
>history".
>
>rgds
>jan I.
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks.
>> >> Haven't seen that.
>> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked
>on
>> >for 6
>> >> month..." means?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the
>> >comments)
>> >
>> >
>> >> Cause for example the bug
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was
>reported
>> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was
>from
>> >"mkca
>> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver
>> >Specht on
>> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is marked
>> >as a
>> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
>> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there
>something
>> >I missed?
>> >>
>> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and
>> >assigned).
>> >
>> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year
>and
>> >assigned
>> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The
>> >assigned
>> >person automatically gets a mail about the change.
>> >
>> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release"
>issues
>> >assigned
>> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know it
>is
>> >free to
>> >be worked on.
>> >
>> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an
>> >overview of
>> >how many issues are actually being worked on.
>> >
>> >rgds
>> >jan I.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Please have a look at
>> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug
>> >deals
>> >> >with this specific issue.
>> >> >
>> >> >rgds
>> >> >jan I.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher
><r....@gmx.ch>
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Hello bugreporter
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which
>> >devs
>> >> >do not
>> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove
>them
>> >> >from the bugs
>> >> >>>> "Assigned To:"
>> >> >>>> field?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> This is a good idea.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
>> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are
>assigned
>> >to
>> >> >bugs from
>> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base
>> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which
>are
>> >> >subscribed
>> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-
>mail
>> >> >adress on
>> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my
>private
>> >at
>> >> >the mailing
>> >> >>> list.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
>> >employee.
>> >> >If you
>> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to
>reset
>> >> >"assigned
>> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob
>> >> >talked about
>> >> >> doing it at that time.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism,
>than
>> >to
>> >> >look after
>> >> >> the individual names.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> rgds
>> >> >> jan I.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Thanks for the work
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Greetings Raphael
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ------------------------------**--------------------------
>---
>> >-
>> >> >**---------
>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
>> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>> >help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>> >----
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 24 September 2013 16:37, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>
> >last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
> ...
> >...if you did the unassignment,
>
> Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
> So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search on
> bugzilla and it did not work.
> How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that exactly
> mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
> this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without beeing
> logged in):
> http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
>
Rob weir is the real bugzilla guru, I am just a user, so he can hopefully
give you more precise ideas.
"was modified" is in my opinion is new comment and/or status. Without
actually having tried it, I think you need to use "search by change
history".
rgds
jan I.
>
>
> On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks.
> >> Haven't seen that.
> >> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked on
> >for 6
> >> month..." means?
> >>
> >
> >Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the
> >comments)
> >
> >
> >> Cause for example the bug
> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was reported
> >> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was from
> >"mkca
> >> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver
> >Specht on
> >> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is marked
> >as a
> >> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
> >> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there something
> >I missed?
> >>
> >It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and
> >assigned).
> >
> >Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year and
> >assigned
> >to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The
> >assigned
> >person automatically gets a mail about the change.
> >
> >The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release" issues
> >assigned
> >to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know it is
> >free to
> >be worked on.
> >
> >It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an
> >overview of
> >how many issues are actually being worked on.
> >
> >rgds
> >jan I.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Please have a look at
> >> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug
> >deals
> >> >with this specific issue.
> >> >
> >> >rgds
> >> >jan I.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hello bugreporter
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which
> >devs
> >> >do not
> >> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them
> >> >from the bugs
> >> >>>> "Assigned To:"
> >> >>>> field?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> This is a good idea.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
> >> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned
> >to
> >> >bugs from
> >> >>>> the bugzilla data base
> >> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are
> >> >subscribed
> >> >>>> to the dev mailing list
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail
> >> >adress on
> >> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private
> >at
> >> >the mailing
> >> >>> list.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
> >employee.
> >> >If you
> >> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset
> >> >"assigned
> >> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob
> >> >talked about
> >> >> doing it at that time.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than
> >to
> >> >look after
> >> >> the individual names.
> >> >>
> >> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
> >> >>
> >> >> rgds
> >> >> jan I.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks for the work
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Greetings Raphael
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> ------------------------------**-----------------------------
> >-
> >> >**---------
> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
> >> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
> >help@openoffice.apache.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >----
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>last modified older and a year and assigned to a person)
...
>...if you did the unassignment,
Well I can not promise to do this but at least I could try.
So trying to achieve this behaviour I tried the Advanced Search on bugzilla and it did not work.
How to get the "was modified" in the search and what does that exactly mean? -> new comment, change of the statusj???
this is my attempt (bugzilla using the advanced search without beeing logged in):
http://img850.imageshack.us/i/a5vl.png/
On 24.09.2013 at 1:14 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks.
>> Haven't seen that.
>> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked on
>for 6
>> month..." means?
>>
>
>Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the
>comments)
>
>
>> Cause for example the bug
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was reported
>> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was from
>"mkca
>> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver
>Specht on
>> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is marked
>as a
>> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
>> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there something
>I missed?
>>
>It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and
>assigned).
>
>Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year and
>assigned
>to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The
>assigned
>person automatically gets a mail about the change.
>
>The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release" issues
>assigned
>to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know it is
>free to
>be worked on.
>
>It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an
>overview of
>how many issues are actually being worked on.
>
>rgds
>jan I.
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >Please have a look at
>> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug
>deals
>> >with this specific issue.
>> >
>> >rgds
>> >jan I.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch>
>> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hello bugreporter
>> >>>
>> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>> >>>
>> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which
>devs
>> >do not
>> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them
>> >from the bugs
>> >>>> "Assigned To:"
>> >>>> field?
>> >>>>
>> >>> This is a good idea.
>> >>>
>> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
>> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned
>to
>> >bugs from
>> >>>> the bugzilla data base
>> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are
>> >subscribed
>> >>>> to the dev mailing list
>> >>>>
>> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail
>> >adress on
>> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private
>at
>> >the mailing
>> >>> list.
>> >>>
>> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN
>employee.
>> >If you
>> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset
>> >"assigned
>> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob
>> >talked about
>> >> doing it at that time.
>> >>
>> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than
>to
>> >look after
>> >> the individual names.
>> >>
>> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>> >>
>> >> rgds
>> >> jan I.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for the work
>> >>>
>> >>> Greetings Raphael
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ------------------------------**-----------------------------
>-
>> >**---------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
>> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
>help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 24 September 2013 12:36, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks.
> Haven't seen that.
> Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked on for 6
> month..." means?
>
Sorry I wrote 6 month it is actually 1year (as written in the comments)
> Cause for example the bug
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was reported
> 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was from "mkca
> 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver Specht on
> ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is marked as a
> duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
> Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there something I missed?
>
It is not a mechanism, but a simply filter (last modified and assigned).
Those issues hit by the filter (last modified older and a year and assigned
to a person), should manually be unassigned without asking. The assigned
person automatically gets a mail about the change.
The idea is/was to do this every now and then to "release" issues assigned
to a person that does not work on it anymore, so we all know it is free to
be worked on.
It would be cool if you did the unassignment, so we can get an overview of
how many issues are actually being worked on.
rgds
jan I.
>
>
> On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >Please have a look at
> >https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug deals
> >with this specific issue.
> >
> >rgds
> >jan I.
> >
> >
> >
> >On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello bugreporter
> >>>
> >>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
> >>>
> >>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs
> >do not
> >>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them
> >from the bugs
> >>>> "Assigned To:"
> >>>> field?
> >>>>
> >>> This is a good idea.
> >>>
> >>> I was thinking of something like this:
> >>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to
> >bugs from
> >>>> the bugzilla data base
> >>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are
> >subscribed
> >>>> to the dev mailing list
> >>>>
> >>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail
> >adress on
> >>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private at
> >the mailing
> >>> list.
> >>>
> >>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN employee.
> >If you
> >>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
> >>>
> >>
> >> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset
> >"assigned
> >> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob
> >talked about
> >> doing it at that time.
> >>
> >> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than to
> >look after
> >> the individual names.
> >>
> >> But thanks for suggesting the work.
> >>
> >> rgds
> >> jan I.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the work
> >>>
> >>> Greetings Raphael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------
> >**---------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
> >unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
> >unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
Thanks.
Haven't seen that.
Can you tell me what "...for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month..." means?
Cause for example the bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20525 was reported 2003-10-01 01:18 UTC by ulim and the last post/comment was from "mkca 2007-05-03 12:24:50 UTC" and it was still assigned to Oliver Specht on ??.??.2013. (Now, thanks to some friendly people, it is marked as a duplicate and there is a "duplicate comment")
Does the mechanism only work for new bugs or is there something I missed?
On 23.09.2013 at 7:46 PM, "janI" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>Please have a look at
>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug deals
>with this specific issue.
>
>rgds
>jan I.
>
>
>
>On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch>
>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello bugreporter
>>>
>>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>>>
>>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs
>do not
>>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them
>from the bugs
>>>> "Assigned To:"
>>>> field?
>>>>
>>> This is a good idea.
>>>
>>> I was thinking of something like this:
>>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to
>bugs from
>>>> the bugzilla data base
>>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are
>subscribed
>>>> to the dev mailing list
>>>>
>>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail
>adress on
>>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private at
>the mailing
>>> list.
>>>
>>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN employee.
>If you
>>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>>>
>>
>> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset
>"assigned
>> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob
>talked about
>> doing it at that time.
>>
>> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than to
>look after
>> the individual names.
>>
>> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the work
>>>
>>> Greetings Raphael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------
>**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-
>unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
Please have a look at
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122035that bug deals
with this specific issue.
rgds
jan I.
On 23 September 2013 18:54, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> Hello bugreporter
>>
>> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>>
>> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>>>
>>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs do not
>>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them from the bugs
>>> "Assigned To:"
>>> field?
>>>
>> This is a good idea.
>>
>> I was thinking of something like this:
>>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to bugs from
>>> the bugzilla data base
>>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are subscribed
>>> to the dev mailing list
>>>
>> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail adress on
>> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private at the mailing
>> list.
>>
>> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN employee. If you
>> are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>>
>
> We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset "assigned
> to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob talked about
> doing it at that time.
>
> I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than to look after
> the individual names.
>
> But thanks for suggesting the work.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
>>
>> Thanks for the work
>>
>> Greetings Raphael
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 23 September 2013 16:19, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Hello bugreporter
>
> Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
>
> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>>
>> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs do not
>> work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them from the bugs
>> "Assigned To:"
>> field?
>>
> This is a good idea.
>
> I was thinking of something like this:
>> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to bugs from
>> the bugzilla data base
>> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are subscribed to
>> the dev mailing list
>>
> This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail adress on
> bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private at the mailing
> list.
>
> There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN employee. If you are
> not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
>
We discussed this theme about 3 month ago, and agreed to reset "assigned
to" for issues that had not been worked on for 6 month. Rob talked about
doing it at that time.
I think it is better to have a generic reset mechanism, than to look after
the individual names.
But thanks for suggesting the work.
rgds
jan I.
>
> Thanks for the work
>
> Greetings Raphael
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch>.
Hello bugreporter
Am 23.09.13 12:45, schrieb bugreporter99@hushmail.com:
> That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
>
> Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs do not work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them from the bugs "Assigned To:"
> field?
This is a good idea.
> I was thinking of something like this:
> #1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to bugs from the bugzilla data base
> #2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are subscribed to the dev mailing list
This is not so a good idea. Same people has different e-mail adress on
bugzilla. I use the apache adress at bugzilla and my private at the
mailing list.
There are a load people assinged to formar Oracle/SUN employee. If you
are not sure about a name you can ask him/her.
Thanks for the work
Greetings Raphael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
That's awesome Andrea, many thanks.
Can someone tell me if it's a good idea to find out which devs do not work on AOO and are still assigned to bugs, and remove them from the bugs "Assigned To:"
field?
I was thinking of something like this:
#1 get all emailaddresses from the devs which are assigned to bugs from the bugzilla data base
#2 compare the list with the people/emailadresses which are subscribed to the dev mailing list
#2 if a dev is assigned to a bug but not subscribed to the dev mailing list -> send him/her a mail and tell that he/she will be removed from the bug in about three weeks if
we do not get a mail from them.
#3 after three weeks send another mail to them and telling them that next day they will be removed from the bug
I think this will not get ALL devs cause there may be some devs not subscribed to the dev list and still working on AOO???
On 21.09.2013 at 5:33 PM, "Andrea Pescetti" <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>On 13/09/2013 bugreporter99 wrote:
>> I tried to change that field when logged in (yes, it's a
>different userid).
>> Does the issue has be reported by me to be able to change the
>fields?
>
>In general it shouldn't, and if you need permissions you can
>obtain them
>by simply asking on the QA list (or here) that your Bugzilla user
>is
>given higher privileges.
>
>In this case, I updated
>https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=107063 to reflect
>this
>discussion.
>
>Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 13/09/2013 bugreporter99 wrote:
> I tried to change that field when logged in (yes, it's a different userid).
> Does the issue has be reported by me to be able to change the fields?
In general it shouldn't, and if you need permissions you can obtain them
by simply asking on the QA list (or here) that your Bugzilla user is
given higher privileges.
In this case, I updated
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=107063 to reflect this
discussion.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>You have to be logged in for doing that. There is no userid
>"bugreporter99" and there are no issues mentioning this userid
>[1]. What
>is your userid in AOO's bugzilla?
I tried to change that field when logged in (yes, it's a different userid).
Does the issue has be reported by me to be able to change the fields?
>He isn't active in the AOO community.
So bugs assigned to devs that are not active anymore are still assigned to them?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 12.09.2013 11:34, bugreporter99@hushmail.com wrote:
> Can someone please tell me how to change the "Latest Confirmation on:" field in a bug report on bugzilla?
You have to be logged in for doing that. There is no userid
"bugreporter99" and there are no issues mentioning this userid [1]. What
is your userid in AOO's bugzilla?
[1] http://s.apache.org/bz_bugreporter99
> Don't get me wrong but can someone also tell me if Oliver Specht is still working on OpenOffice cause the first bug is from 2003?
He isn't active in the AOO community.
Herbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
Can someone please tell me how to change the "Latest Confirmation on:" field in a bug report on bugzilla?
Don't get me wrong but can someone also tell me if Oliver Specht is still working on OpenOffice cause the first bug is from 2003?
(don't know if there is a chance that on the way OO->Oracle->Apache the list of active developers is/was updated)
thx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by bu...@hushmail.com.
>> I marked the duplicate issues you suggested. Please log in and
>update the
>> version on your own if you would. If there is some problem you
>can't do
>> this, please let us know.
thanks
>For re-confirming issues such as 107063 we have the field "latest
>confirmation on". The version field itself should record when a
>bug
>first appeared.
Ok I see the "Latest Confirmation on:" field but I'm too stupid to change it (no thing such a drop-down box).
>Also we there is no release of AOO 4.0.1 yet, there are only
>snapshots
>on the way to 4.0.1 that use "4.0.1" in various strings for
>technical
>reasons. So recording a bug against a pre-release should only be
>against
>e.g. AOO401-dev but not against the target version.
yes it was a snapshot
thx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 08.09.2013 23:38, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 6:55 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can someone please set the bugs:
>> 26331
>> 20525
>> as duplicate of:
>> 107063
>>
>> And change the "Version" of 107063 to 4.0.1.
>> I tested this on Apache_OpenOffice_4.0.1_Win_x86_install_en-GB.exe on XP
>> and this bug still occurs.
>> (tested with frames of images and tables)
Thanks for checking this issue with our latest snapshot! Knowing that a
bug is still there is an important data point.
> I marked the duplicate issues you suggested. Please log in and update the
> version on your own if you would. If there is some problem you can't do
> this, please let us know.
For re-confirming issues such as 107063 we have the field "latest
confirmation on". The version field itself should record when a bug
first appeared.
Also we there is no release of AOO 4.0.1 yet, there are only snapshots
on the way to 4.0.1 that use "4.0.1" in various strings for technical
reasons. So recording a bug against a pre-release should only be against
e.g. AOO401-dev but not against the target version.
Herbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: bug 107063 (needs update)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 6:55 AM, <bu...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Can someone please set the bugs:
> 26331
> 20525
> as duplicate of:
> 107063
>
> And change the "Version" of 107063 to 4.0.1.
> I tested this on Apache_OpenOffice_4.0.1_Win_x86_install_en-GB.exe on XP
> and this bug still occurs.
> (tested with frames of images and tables)
> thx
>
I marked the duplicate issues you suggested. Please log in and update the
version on your own if you would. If there is some problem you can't do
this, please let us know.
Thanks.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged
to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't."
-- "Following the Equator", Mark Twain