ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Micheal Harker <michealh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

oops I clicked send there by accident. The reply is AFTERthe original message.

On 18 Aug 2010, at 23:16, Micheal Harker <michealh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 1. Do you promise to be polite to bug reporters even if they are rude
> to you or Ubuntu? Have you signed the Ubuntu Code of Conduct?
> 
> Yes. I have signed the Code of Conduct and yes I will be polite whenever someone my hurt me of my feelings for ubuntu. I believe CONSTRUCTIVE criticism will make Ubuntu even better.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 2. Have you read Bugs/HowToTriage, Bugs/Assignment, Bugs/Status and
> Bugs/Importance? Do you have any questions about that documentation?
> 
> Nope, It seems pretty straight forward and I use Ubuntu on a Day so I can check some bugs out then. Also, If I had any questions on the matter as they arise I can ask on IRC before carrying out an action.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 3. What sensitive data should you look for in a private Apport crash
> report bug before making it public? See Bugs/HowToTriage for more
> information.
> 
> I defiantly heard from there that if a CoreDump.gz is attached then make the report private. The file may contain sensitive information but I have to subscribe myself first.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 4. Is there a particular package or group of packages
> that you are interested in helping out with?
> 
> Acctually no, I am a sorta what We should call "all rounder" at buy reporting and answering. I try to get all the new Bugs  sorted and as being as I have lots of time let's see If I can get the list down to a manageable number using what the wiki page tells us :)
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 5. Please list five or more bugs which you have triaged. These bugs
> should demonstrate your understanding of the triage process and how to
> properly handle bugs. For *each* of these bugs, please point out what
> Importance (and reasoning) you would give it after becoming a member
> of Ubuntu Bug Control. Please use URLs in your list of bugs. 
> 
> Bug #616538 - I chose medium for severity and Medium was decided upon. This is because some people may want to install the package but can't.
> 
> Big #616536 - I thought the severity should have been medium. It was picked Medium I said It was because if a ubuntu use likes that screensaver and has some work ing
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Micheal Harker. Goto www.michealh.co.cc today! I Sent from my iPod of packages
> that you are interested in helping out with?
> 
> Acctually no, I am a sorta what We should call "all rounder" at buy reporting and answering. I try to get all the new Bugs  sorted and as being as I have lots of time let's see If I can get the list down to a manageable number using what the wiki page tells us :)
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 5. Please list five or more bugs which you have triaged. These bugs
> should demonstrate your understanding of the triage process and how to
> properly handle bugs. For *each* of these bugs, please point out what
> Importance (and reasoning) you would give it after becoming a member
> of Ubuntu Bug Control. Please use URLs in your list of bugs. 
> 
> Bug #616538 - I chose medium for severity and Medium was decided upon. This is because some people may want to install the package but can't.
> 
> Big #616536 - I thought the severity should have been medium. It was picked Medium I said It was because if a ubuntu use likes that screensaver and has some work ing
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Micheal Harker. Goto www.michealh.co.cc today! I Sent from my iPod


Anyway Let me continue 

If the user wanted to have the screensaver but had apt running he would soon find out apt broke because of it. Not Good.

Bug #616581 - I decided Medium again but the bug was classified as high. I thought it should of been medium because It wouldn't affect the majority of users. But now I understand why it is high.

 Bug #619532 - This bug was triaged in Ubuntu (as well as 100 paper cuts). I decided on Low because It could annoy people just the tiniest bit. But I was set to wishlist which is even better than low for this. I also understand why It was wishlist material.

Bug #616446 - It was suggested at low and It had gotten the Low status I decided on Low because It wasn't really Wishlist nor Important It was just a general issue that didn't need to have the same priority as other big massive bugs because It Network manager was perfectly fine but It just needed that tweak. It was fixed in a later update.
---------------------------------
Micheal Harker. Goto www.michealh.co.cc today! I Sent from my iPod


>