Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bugzilla Help"

From SME Server
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (Shouldl have a .sig now...)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  
Is there a way to add in the top quick links in bugzilla, an item like wiki Recent Changes?
+
The template layout for bug verification differs from that template proposed here: http://wiki.contribs.org/SME_Server:Documentation:QA:Verification  Which is it to be? [[User:Trex|Terry Fage]] ([[User talk:Trex|talk]]) 00:04, 27 February 2013 (MST)
  
--[[User:PicsOne|Normando Hall]] 06:24, 23 October 2007 (MDT)
+
Donno Terry ... Just come across this page and the one over in documentation. As posted into devinfo:
  
top right > recently active = active in last 2 days
+
What would be really useful and lower the barrier imposed (for good reasons) by having to use it would be a version with guidance for each section that can be copy 'n pasted into bugzilla.
  
[[User:Snoble|Snoble]] 06:44, 23 October 2007 (MDT)
+
The full example on http://wiki.contribs.org/Bugzilla_Help#Verifying_Bugs is close to meeting that requirement.
  
 
+
By "guidance" I mean the commands to run to gather the system information, or show the version of the affected package, for example
Looks good Stephndl, will have a carefule read and let you know [[User:Trex|Trex]] ([[User talk:Trex|talk]]) 14:26, 3 February 2013 (MST)
+
<pre>
 +
= ENVIRONMENT:
 +
Post the output from these commands:
 +
cat /etc/*-release
 +
uname -mrs
 +
/sbin/e-smith/audittools/newrpms
 +
</pre>
 +
Some of the other fields ought to be marked optional. If I'm only verifying a bug I don't have enough information to get involved in changelog entries, release notes or documentation. I also feel it's up to some one further up the tree to set bug flags.[[User:Allsorts|Allsorts]] ([[User talk:Allsorts|talk]]) 11:20, 6 January 2015 (CET)

Latest revision as of 11:20, 6 January 2015

The template layout for bug verification differs from that template proposed here: http://wiki.contribs.org/SME_Server:Documentation:QA:Verification Which is it to be? Terry Fage (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2013 (MST)

Donno Terry ... Just come across this page and the one over in documentation. As posted into devinfo:

What would be really useful and lower the barrier imposed (for good reasons) by having to use it would be a version with guidance for each section that can be copy 'n pasted into bugzilla.

The full example on http://wiki.contribs.org/Bugzilla_Help#Verifying_Bugs is close to meeting that requirement.

By "guidance" I mean the commands to run to gather the system information, or show the version of the affected package, for example

= ENVIRONMENT:
Post the output from these commands:
cat /etc/*-release
uname -mrs
/sbin/e-smith/audittools/newrpms

Some of the other fields ought to be marked optional. If I'm only verifying a bug I don't have enough information to get involved in changelog entries, release notes or documentation. I also feel it's up to some one further up the tree to set bug flags.Allsorts (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2015 (CET)