Devs: Can you give a bit of insight on the bug repair process?

[Eagle_f90]

I was just going though the "accepted bugs" board and there is over 70 pages of bugs then I decided to see what bugs where in the "Confirmed/Planning to address" board and there is a scant 5 threads. As a software developer my self I know that bugs come in way faster then you can repair them but with over 1400 bug reports accepted that is a very low ratio of confirmed vs accepted. I was hoping maybe some more insight could be given on this hole process works. Right now we know it is:
1. User reports bug
2. reports gets accepted/rejected
3.?????
4. Bug moved to confirmed/working as intended
6.Patch
7. Bug moved to fixed

I would love to know things like the process of confirming a bug, is there a dedicated team to testing out reported bugs, a dedicated bug fix team or is it the same team that develops the next content, what type of bugs get priority over others, is anyone just doing the "low hanging fruit" bugs (i.e. a bug that would take just a few hours to fix and test), ect.

[Ninix]

I wouldn't rely on the thread counts in that forum as indication of much. Remember that the game is developed in Japan and on top of that JP dev team almost certainly has their own internal bug tracker completely separate from the forums. I doubt the dev team even looks at the Bug Report forums, that's a job for the Community Managers or QA department.

Most likely, CMs are sifting through the bug report forums, compiling lists of popular or easy-to-reproduce bugs and making sure they follow the basic template specified in the sticky. Valid reports are moved to Accepted. These lists are presumably then passed to QA, who are responsible for actually confirming and reproducing the issues as well as creating formal reports that are hopefully more helpful than "lol muh macros dont wurk sometimes pls fix btw the browser im using is goggle chrome".

Then the formal reports sit in the bug tracker until they're assigned to an engineer and eventually fixed in the development branch, to await deployment in the next major patch. If it's a small or critically important fix it might be merged into a hotfix or minor (ie. 2.25) patch instead.

I seriously doubt any of the CMs are specifically digging through the internal bug tracker for closed issues for the purpose of figuring out what to move from the Accepted/Confirmed forums to the Fixed one. Most likely the only threads they move to Fixed are ones regarding issues they *know* have been fixed (ie. stuff that was in the official patch notes that they translated).