Quality Control Center - handling of bug reports

[Sarah Reichelt]

> There are about 10 or more (minor to critical) bugs associated with the
> group object, which have cost me plenty of time and a huge amount of
> frustation to get to the details of these bugs and eventually to find out
> workarounds if possible. These bugs seem to be totally outside the scope and
> interest of the RunRev team.
> My bug report  8275 of Sept. 16, 2009, "Groups: Bugs and features ("last
> group" broken)?", which listed 5 of these group bugs, is stiil shown as
> "unconfirned" as of today - nearly 11 months later!
>
> If they should indeed have looked at the report and cannot replicate the
> bugs, I would at least expect an organized attempt to communicate with the
> bug reporter, maybe asking him for more information or a sample stack
> etc.etc..
>  As an active supporter and user of Revolution since its beginnings I am of
> course aware of the difficulties and the multitude of tasks the Rev team has
> to address with limited personal resources. But I think there is an urgent
> need to re-organize  the handling of bug reports and the management of the
> so-called "Quality Control Center". To completely disregard valuable
> feedback from motivated users is not the way to keep up or build trust for
> Revolution and its developers.

I completely agree Wilhelm.

As I said in an email to this list about a month ago, we would all
much prefer to see our bugs listed as "Confirmed" even if there was no
immediate prospect of a fix. At least it would indicate that the bug
report had been looked at.

Kevin responded to my email at the time, and although I forget his
exact words, he did imply that they were aware that better
communication was needed. Hopefully this will new attitude will extend
to the list and to the bug reports.

Cheers,
Sarah

Rodeo discussion:
http://rodeoapps.com/rodeo-discuss-among-yourselves