fwding the discussion I just had with Ian, as I think what we wrote can be usefull -------- Message original -------- Sujet: Re: [Koha-devel] Some changes to saved queries Date : Fri, 9 Mar 2012 07:49:58 -0500 De : Ian Walls <koha.sekjal@gmail.com> Pour : Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com> I would agree a default chronological sort for these reports would be the best. It doesn't affect how I do my QA, and can provide some valuable extra info to everyone. ++ Ian On Mar 9, 2012 6:28 AM, "Paul Poulain" <paul.poulain@biblibre.com <mailto:paul.poulain@biblibre.com>> wrote: Le 09/03/2012 12:24, Ian Walls wrote: > For my end, I don't always QA in the order the report gives. Some > patches are much quicker to evaluate than others, and the blocks of time > I have to do QA are of varying lengths and intensities. So, I pick the > combination of bug reports that look like they'd fit into the time I have. > > Not the most systematic approach, but effective. I know, I understand and I agree. One could also say that a "BLO" bug must be QAed before an ENH. My main concern here is that everybody is aware that there are some patches that are waiting for a long period. If you look at the 10 patches that need signoff for more than 2 months, most of them are quite tricky (and probably boring). But at least we know that they're waiting. Otherwise, they're lost in the middle of other patches ! PS: and i'm just asking for the DEFAULT order, that you can change in 1 clic. I don't request a rule saying "one MUST signoff/QA/..." in last change date order (even if I think it would not be a silly rule, it's not an applicable one for our community) -- Paul POULAIN http://www.biblibre.com Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08