W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > October 2002

Re: [check] Public Bugzilla?

From: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:24:03 +0900
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
Message-Id: <59DD9556-EC99-11D6-B02F-000393BAB03A@w3.org>

Hi Terje, All.

On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 04:52 Asia/Tokyo, Terje Bless wrote:
>
> One caveat with a public bug database would be that we'd need the 
> access
> controls to work as we want them to; so Joe R. Webduhsigner can't
> accidentally or maliciously close a bug, change milestone goals,
> assignments, or wreak other havoc. Having the ability for anyone to 
> create
> bugs, confirm bugs, or add comments would be very good.

Hmm, yes, a read-only bugzilla may certainly be less useful, but at 
least it would be better than nothing at all. However, I believe 
bugzilla is flexible enough, and we could give "visitors" the proper 
rights while avoiding abuses. ...Or maybe not, at least the group 
editor does not seem flexible enough.
http://bugs.tj.unn.no/editgroups.cgi



> However, there is also a question of what the intention behind this
> Bugzilla is.

My plan would be to use it for public bug tracking of public QA 
software dev.
If other things don't fit, then they look for another bugzilla. Simple 
:)


>  A public Bugzilla is far too usefull to let it get shot down by the
> mere theoretical possibility that some other mode of operation /may/ be
> needed at some point in the future.

+1. Definitely.

-- 
Olivier Thereaux - W3C - QA : http://www.w3.org/QA/
http://www.w3.org/People/olivier | http://yoda.zoy.org
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 01:24:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:43 GMT