[Koha-devel] Fwd: Re: Some changes to saved queries

[Paul Poulain]

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 at gmail.com>
Pour : 	Paul Poulain <paul.poulain at 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 at biblibre.com
<mailto:paul.poulain at 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