Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bugzilla Help"
(recently active) |
m (Shouldl have a .sig now...) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | 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) | |
| − | + | 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. | |
| − | [[User: | + | 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)
