1 |
On 16:07 Thu 28 Apr , Christian Ruppert wrote: |
2 |
> So once again: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html |
5 |
Ok, so, we should choose one of two ways: |
6 |
1. The old one [1] |
7 |
2. The new one [2] |
8 |
|
9 |
From my point of view, the problem currently is that the ways above are |
10 |
mixed. A user files a bug. The bug has UNCONFIRMED status. Then, someone |
11 |
with editbugs priveleges tries to assign the bug. He has the NEW, ASSIGNED |
12 |
and RESOLVED options to change its status. A bug is assigned to a team/ |
13 |
maintainter. The maintainer can change its status from NEW to ASSIGNED |
14 |
or RESOLVED. The maintainer marks the bug as RESOLVED. He can change |
15 |
that status again to UNCONFIRMED, REOPENED, VERIFIED or CLOSED. Even the |
16 |
RESOLVED <something> can be FIXED, INVALID, WONTFIX, DUPLICATE, |
17 |
WORKSFORME, CANTFIX, NEEDINFO, TEST-REQUEST, UPSTREAM, OBSOLETE. Someone |
18 |
would say that CANTFIX and UPSTREAM could be merged. The same with |
19 |
WONTFIX and OBSOLETE (it's a theory, I don't say we should do it). |
20 |
> ... |
21 |
> REOPENED gone, |
22 |
> CLOSED gone. VERIFIED will be added. |
23 |
What is the meaning of VERIFIED? (I also never understood the meaning of |
24 |
the old CLOSED). |
25 |
> |
26 |
> So I think we should convert... |
27 |
I think we should convert to the new [2] model too. |
28 |
|
29 |
The only reason I asked about the whole "workflow thing" on irc was because |
30 |
sometimes I get confused by all these options. I believe we should |
31 |
simplify them and update the bug-wranglers guide accordingly. |
32 |
|
33 |
[1] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.6/en/html/lifecycle.html |
34 |
[2] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html |
35 |
|
36 |
ps: To everyone who helped with the upgrade of bugzie: Thanks guys! I |
37 |
can understand it wasn't easy. |
38 |
-- |
39 |
Panagiotis Christopoulos ( pchrist ) |
40 |
( Gentoo Lisp Project ) |