简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
FelixAli0197 · 2026年1月1日 16:32 UTC
Can each of those attempts be linked to one housing identity, including the records restored after restart?
18分Keep attempt workload as a separate measure. It is useful for planning, just not as the number of physical housings accepted. No need to throw away the busy part of the story.
14分Does the headline total also appear in the exported report? A corrected screen would be a rather small victory if purchasing still receives the old number.
9分Sarah, yes, all ninety-eight link to eighty-two housings. Bruno, export repeats the same inflated count. Current dispositions are seventy-six accepted, four held and two rejected, which is less exciting but actually adds up.
-3分Show held and rejected separately; whoever arranges the next work needs different answers for those two groups
8分Use the current authorised disposition for each identified housing, with its attempts retained beneath it; then repeated delivery of a result should not produce another accepted housing.
6分And test a later change of disposition. I mean an authorised change, not a software guess. The count needs to reflect it without deleting why the earlier decision was made.
9分Try reopening the application after that change as well. Otherwise the old accepted total may be waiting patiently to return from storage.
4分The revised offline report shows the three disposition groups and the separate ninety-eight attempts. Duplicate delivery leaves the item totals alone. Later disposition changes and restart are still on the maintainer's test list.
13分Who signs off the item list behind those totals?
17分Quality owns that comparison against the disposition records. I have sent the actual housing list, not just the three numbers. Until they check it and the remaining tests pass, this is a test report.
16分此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .