GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 41739
Thoroughly check all failure cases in Sample Loser and Content Loser
Last modified: 2004-12-22 21:47:04 UTC
Sample/Content Loser allow us to experience failures at different points in the code flow. Some of those failures are now handled nicely, others are not. We need to check each failure case and make sure there is (or invent) a fix for it. This was split off from bug 40762, because it's not really a feature and can be put into a later milestone than "required". If we had a testing group, we would perhaps assign it to them. ------- Additional Comments From eli@eazel.com 2000-10-16 19:32:29 ---- Batch-assigning QA ownership of remaining bugs to eli@eazel.com ------- Additional Comments From mjs@noisehavoc.org 2000-11-15 18:37:34 ---- Eli, you lucky winner, sullivan or I can give you instructions on how to do this testing work. ------- Additional Comments From eli@eazel.com 2000-11-27 16:01:54 ---- Maciej, I'm sorry for not following up on this; I've been trapped in a twisty maze of installation test scenarios, all alike. Could you or Sullivan possibly elaborate in this bug report what needs to be done, and I'll get to it after our Colossal Adventure? Thanks! ------- Additional Comments From eli@eazel.com 2000-12-06 16:29:23 ---- [the environment variables that control this are cited in nautilus/components/README.] ------- Additional Comments From don@eazel.com 2000-12-15 09:32:30 ---- Batch move all 254 PR3 P5 bugs to 1.0.1. ------- Additional Comments From eli@eazel.com 2000-12-15 10:06:18 ---- Specifically: http://cvs.gnome.org/lxr/source/nautilus/components/loser/ ------- Bug moved to this database by unknown@bugzilla.gnome.org 2001-09-09 20:33 ------- Bug depends on bug(s) 40762.
Changing to "old" target milestone for all bugs laying around with no milestone set.
Yup, we should do this. But we're not tracking things like this with the bug database any more.