Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: INVALID -> NOCHANGE in bugzilla

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

I think that there is a problem of concept. If a bug is marked INVALID, 
it's because it is not a real bug. Marking a bug NOCHANGE or 
NOCHANGEREQUIRED, not only overlaps with other resolutions, but fails to 
better explain the reason why the bug was closed, whereas INVALID indeed 
means that the reported bug is simply not a bug or that it was reported 
to the wrong place.

Even though it might look harsh to the user to get such a resolution, 
it's also harsh for the developers to have to handle bugs that are not 
related to them.

Still, changing the name from INVALID to NOTABUG + NOTOURBUG does make 
sense, as the meaning doesn't get lost.

Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:14:38 +0100
> Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 18:34:21 +0100
>> "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn@g.o> wrote:
>>
>>> People reporting bugs often get annoyed when their bug is marked
>>> INVALID; especially when they're relatively new to the Gentoo
>>> Experience.  We've all seen it many times, I'm sure.
>>>
>>> Arguably no bug is invalid in the normal sense - if someone raises
>>> an issue, they have an issue, regardless what we think of it.  To
>>> that end I'd like to propose bugzilla be reconfigured to use the
>>> phrase "NOCHANGE" instead of "INVALID".  NOCHANGE would indicate
>>> that whatever the original issue, no change is needed on our part to
>>> resolve the issue.
>> _If_ it's changed then please to something else, NOCHANGE would
>> overlap with other values (WONTFIX, CANTFIX, WORKSFORME) and isn't
>> that obvious to me at least. A fake resolution that's mentioned on
>> IRC from time to time is NOTABUG which would fit better here.
>
> Well, I meant for NOCHANGE to be "no change needed", but figured
> NOCHANGEREQUIRED is a bit longwinded.  It implies the issue is
> understood, it has been explained to the bug reporter, but requires no
> change to anything:
>
> CANTFIX: the problem exists, but no sensible way to fix it exists
> WONTFIX: the problem exists, but for some reason it won't be fixed
> WORKSFORME: can't replicate
>
> NOCHANGE: no change needed
>
> The problem I have with NOTABUG is pretty much the same problem I have
> with INVALID - it's not as severe, but it still does the same thing to
> the user (i.e. slaps him with a wet fish rather than a frozen one).
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list