Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Krzysztof Pawlik <nelchael@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla?
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 10:04:13
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla? by "Petteri Räty"
1 On 04/03/10 10:50, Petteri Räty wrote:
2 > I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it just
3 > means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a
4 > different resolution should be used. So what do you think about
5 > disabling later? I would like to avoid things like this:
6 >
7 >
8 >
9 > Not applicable to the bug above but in general our social contract says:
10 > "We will not hide problems"
12 Sounds good, can we at the same time get RESOLVED OBSOLETE (for bugs that are
13 not valid anymore due to changed situation, RESOLVED INVALID isn't applicable in
14 this case as it implies the bug is and was invalid from the begining).
16 When we kill RESOLVED LATER maybe we could also kill RESOLVED REMIND? I don't
17 remember it being very useful.
19 --
20 Krzysztof Pawlik <nelchael at> key id: 0xF6A80E46
21 desktop-misc, java, apache, ppc, vim, kernel, python...


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