You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@openoffice.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2013/07/23 15:56:50 UTC
[Bug 122803] Make sure that developers read Bug reports related to
their field of activity
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122803
V Stuart Foote <vs...@utsa.edu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|CONFIRMED |UNCONFIRMED
CC| |andrefischerfeb@googlemail.
| |com, robweir@apache.org,
| |vstuart.foote@utsa.edu
Issue Type|DEFECT |TASK
Ever confirmed|1 |0
--- Comment #1 from V Stuart Foote <vs...@utsa.edu> ---
@Rainer,
Yes, I'd also rather open and then track "issues" within a fully described
Bugzilla record. A record is then all concisely present in one location
regardless of external discussion.
But, you'll note that as Andre F. pointed out, that the
issues@openoffice.apache.org address IS subscribed by default to a new Bugzilla
reported issue. I believe key developers and members of the PMC already
receive Bugzilla generated issues to that mail list. So our preference to raise
a properly described issue using just the Bugzilla framework is already routed
for mail list distribution. What you've asked for is already accomplished.
Mail list based discussions are not going away, but what might be helpful would
be better linkage from within a Bugzilla issue back to substantive discussions
occurring on mail lists. Along the lines of the "see also" to tie one's choice
of archival Mark mail or Nabble listing linking any discussion back to the BZ
issue.
=-=-=
Links for this issue
Nabble for example
http://openoffice.2283327.n4.nabble.com/Bug-122803-Make-sure-that-developers-read-Bug-reports-related-to-their-field-of-activity-tp4648340.html
Mark's mail
http://markmail.org/search/?q=openoffice+date%3A201307+%22developers+read+Bug+reports+related%22
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.