Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bugzilla Help"

From SME Server
Jump to navigationJump to search
(flags)
 
m (Shouldl have a .sig now...)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  
flags
+
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)
  
what do the -+? mean, when do you set them, if in doubt just use + ?? <br>
+
Donno Terry ... Just come across this page and the one over in documentation. As posted into devinfo:
not sure why we have some of the flags, check comments below
 
  
[[User:Snoble|Snoble]] 21:54, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
+
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
 +
<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 12:20, 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)