Issue 19900 - need explanation of "version" field
Summary: need explanation of "version" field
Status: CLOSED NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE
Alias: None
Product: Infrastructure
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: Bugzilla (show other issues)
Version: current
Hardware: All Linux, all
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: issues@www
QA Contact: issues@www
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-09-22 18:08 UTC by bulbul
Modified: 2003-12-27 10:23 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description bulbul 2003-09-22 18:08:02 UTC 
I have recently seen several cases of people incorrectly changing the version
field on a bug. The word "Version:/Found in version:" on the IssueZilla form
should be linked to a short page which explains that the version field is used
to indicate the bug against which the bug is first being reported and that it
should not be updated to always show the most recent OOo version which manifests
the bug. (A bug reported against an older version is assumed to be unfixed in
later versions until we indicate otherwise, such as by marking as fixed or
worksforme.) 

Most other field labels such as "Issue type", "OS", and "Resolution priority"
are already linked to an explanation. For the "version" field, we need this
explanation linked from the "Found in version" label in the enter_bug.cgi page
and the from the "Version" label in the show_bug.cgi page. The latter is the one
of particular performance, because it is from the show_bug.cgi page that people
are doing these incorrect updates.
Comment 1 bulbul 2003-09-22 18:09:44 UTC 
(I meant "particular importance", not "particular performance".)
Comment 2 Joost Andrae 2003-09-23 15:33:17 UTC 
JA: with the current infrastructure of IssueZilla this cannot be
fixed. Maybe it can be fixed with the upcoming version. As this is
more a thing to be discussed I would recommend to discuss this within
the dev@qa mailing list
Comment 3 Joost Andrae 2003-09-23 15:33:35 UTC 
JA: closing issue