From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-40460-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1NyBKF-0000qo-NS
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:56:19 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 59DB6E095A;
	Sat,  3 Apr 2010 21:56:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr (smtp5-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.5])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF87E0881
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat,  3 Apr 2010 21:56:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2350FD480DD
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat,  3 Apr 2010 23:56:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (log77-2-82-242-9-23.fbx.proxad.net [82.242.9.23])
	by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AA86D48024
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat,  3 Apr 2010 23:55:04 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla?
From: Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org>
References: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-4HdmoEaFYK5CeFB/la14"
Organization: Gentoo
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 23:35:58 +0200
Message-ID: <1270330558.15538.4.camel@keitaro.perronet.esiee.net>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3.1 
X-Archives-Salt: bed54a34-8787-4356-b2b8-48cad052cc91
X-Archives-Hash: 482d7cc52905c7c456d466826e34b155


--=-4HdmoEaFYK5CeFB/la14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Le samedi 03 avril 2010 =C3=A0 12:50 +0300, Petteri R=C3=A4ty a =C3=A9crit =
:
> I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it just
> means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a
> different resolution should be used. So what do you think about
> disabling later?

You are trying to remove a valid status for a case that has been badly
managed ??? Speaking for gnome herd, afaik, all bugs marked LATER are
for the simple reason they will be done later and no other status would
be fine expect REJECTED maybe, but we don't want to say that to the face
of the reported like this do we ?

--=20
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo

--=-4HdmoEaFYK5CeFB/la14
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Ceci est une partie de message
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAku3tL0ACgkQ1fmVwcYIWAbwsQCdHylGEDB0edoiA4tM33rmmpNZ
Y54AnjsM6EJN07zSyyxDdL3Pee/wlIxv
=VcmZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-4HdmoEaFYK5CeFB/la14--