Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla - New Default Status Workflow
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 01:25:47
Message-Id: 201105010324.48769.reavertm@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla - New Default Status Workflow by Christian Ruppert
On Thursday 28 of April 2011 16:07:24 Christian Ruppert wrote:
> So once again: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html > > *Every* new bug filed by a user without editbugs will have "UNCONFIRMED" > (old NEW) as fixed status. > *If* we don't enable the UNCONFIRMED status at all then it will > CONFIRMED as default but we would enable the UNCONFIRMED status. > > Bug wranglers can then assign the bug and they also *can* mark it as > CONFIRMED *if* they *can* confirm it. > The maintainer may change the status to IN_PROGRESS (old ASSIGNED) > afterwards. > > The snipped of my first mail may be a bit confusing... It just means: > NEW will become CONFIRMED, NEW has been fully replaced by CONFIRMED so > NEW is gone but CONFIRMED is *not* the new default status. CONFIRMED > would/could be the default for everybody with editbugs. > ASSIGNED gone, replacement: IN_PROGRESS, > REOPENED gone,
+1 (with comment, see below) It makes a lot more sense (and it's free from enterprisey meaning wrt ASSIGNED and such) I'd leave the default resolution status for newly created bug as UNCONFIRMED also for editbugs-accounts. It's not that it cannot be changed to CONFIRMED in 'new bug' extended form.
> CLOSED gone. VERIFIED will be added.
I have a little worry thought (that may have been addressed somewhere in this thread) - why is VERIFIED being added? To me it's not needed at all and there are people who seem to have the same opinion: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg39023.html -- regards MM

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature