| 1 |
On 16/06/16 14:19, James Le Cuirot wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:14:44 +0200 |
| 3 |
> Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>> What I'd like to introduce instead is a new STABILIZED state. It |
| 6 |
>>> would -- like VERIFIED now -- be only available for bugs already |
| 7 |
>>> RESOLVED, and it could be used to signify that the fix has made it |
| 8 |
>>> into stable. |
| 9 |
>>> |
| 10 |
>>> While this wouldn't be really obligatory, it would be meaningful for |
| 11 |
>>> trackers that need to ensure that fixes in packages have made it to |
| 12 |
>>> stable -- like the functions.sh use tracker. |
| 13 |
>> The description of InVCS keyword in bugzilla is: |
| 14 |
>> InVCS Fix has been added to a VCS(either CVS, SVN, Git, ...) |
| 15 |
>> repository. Will be closed when fixes are applied to a stable level |
| 16 |
>> package. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> A bug isn't resolved until it is fixed in a stable package (for |
| 19 |
>> packages ever in stable to begin with), but InVCS keyword can be used |
| 20 |
>> by developers to filter out the bugs for issues to work with. I |
| 21 |
>> oppose a change to that behavior, although I would like to see it |
| 22 |
>> being used more consistently as it seems quite a few developers are |
| 23 |
>> neglecting the stable tree. |
| 24 |
> I currently set InVCS for pending-stable fixes in conjunction with the |
| 25 |
> IN_PROGRESS state. I would like to keep InVCS at least. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
Possibly a 'COMMITTED' tag would fit this slightly better? There is room |
| 28 |
for some QA 'VERIFIED' tag too, but don't know whether this is |
| 29 |
absolutely necessary for Gentoo .. thoughts welcomed, though. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I prefer this Lifecycle diagram to that published in the latest docs: |
| 32 |
https://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.6/en/html/lifecycle.html . |
Archives