<html><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">+1 to resolving the
discussion before making bugzilla changes :)<br>
(although the outcome of that discussion isn't a blocker for starting
work on bug 990980).<br>
<br>
i would prefer to avoid adding another custom field if possible, as
there's overheads for each bug field we carry.<br>
keywords may be a viable alternative.<br>
(to be clear, i'm not say "no custom field", instead "could we do it
with an existing field").<br>
<br>
<br>
-glob<br>
<br>
Anthony Hughes wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1765296739.16256777.1400008311529.JavaMail.zimbra@mozilla.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">RE: QA Whiteboard
Robert Kaiser has started a separate discussion about the ambiguity around QA tags, flags, and keywords:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.quality/7kiVWvgsrI8">https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.quality/7kiVWvgsrI8</a>
Perhaps we could resolve that discussion before pulling a trigger on any Bugzilla changes?
Anthony Hughes
Senior Test Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
----- Original Message -----
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">From: "Gavin Sharp" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gavin@gavinsharp.com"><gavin@gavinsharp.com></a>
To: "Jared Wein" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jaws@mozilla.com"><jaws@mozilla.com></a>
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jchaulk@mozilla.com">jchaulk@mozilla.com</a>, "Marco Mucci" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mmucci@mozilla.com"><mmucci@mozilla.com></a>, "Firefox Dev" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:firefox-dev@mozilla.org"><firefox-dev@mozilla.org></a>, "byron jones"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:glob@mozilla.com"><glob@mozilla.com></a>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 11:33:37 AM
Subject: Bugspam generated by the new process (was: Re: Proposed Revision to Iterative Development)
Thread hijack, just a little :)
I agree with you that the bugspam from whiteboard annotations is
annoying. I've been assuming we'd address that by:
- moving to using the QA whiteboard (introduced in bug 978850) for the
[qa] tagging
- introducing a similar new custom field for the "point value" and
"iteration" tagging
- fixing bug 990980 to allow people to opt out of bugmail for such changes
glob, does that plan sound feasible?
</pre></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br><span style="color: rgb(192, 192,
192);">byron jones - :glob - bugzilla.mozilla.org team -</span><br
style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);">
<br style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);">
</div>
</body></html>