From: Mart Raudsepp <leio@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla?
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 03:54:58 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1270428898.19463.6.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1397 bytes --]
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 12:50 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> 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? I would like to avoid things like this:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113121#c21
>
> Not applicable to the bug above but in general our social contract says:
> "We will not hide problems"
The problem is really the RESOLVED connotation and the hiding that goes
along with that on searches, etc.
The LATER status itself can be useful when used properly (more as
"ASSIGNED LATER"). In the lack of that some bigger teams might need to
think of other methods to get things meant for LATER out of main views
of huge bug lists.
In my case, I want to have a "gnome" saved search that shows all OPEN
(non-LATER) bugs directly assigned to gnome, and another saved search
that shows those where gnome@ is merely in CC, or anything marked as
LATER. Though that might not be achievable, so three saved searches
really.
More useful might be a date field upon which it will simply
automatically re-open. Maybe something one is unable to set more than 30
or so days into the future.
--
Mart Raudsepp
Gentoo Developer
Mail: leio@gentoo.org
Weblog: http://blogs.gentoo.org/leio
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-05 0:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-03 9:50 [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla? Petteri Räty
2010-04-03 10:03 ` Krzysztof Pawlik
2010-04-03 10:09 ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2010-04-03 10:27 ` Krzysztof Pawlik
2010-04-04 16:55 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2010-04-03 15:25 ` Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
2010-04-03 17:10 ` Petteri Räty
2010-04-03 17:54 ` Alec Warner
2010-04-03 18:23 ` Petteri Räty
2010-04-05 17:58 ` Denis Dupeyron
2010-04-03 18:58 ` Tiziano Müller
2010-04-03 21:35 ` Gilles Dartiguelongue
2010-04-03 22:01 ` Alec Warner
2010-04-04 9:05 ` Petteri Räty
2010-04-04 9:16 ` Nirbheek Chauhan
2010-04-04 9:36 ` Petteri Räty
2010-04-05 17:54 ` Denis Dupeyron
2010-04-05 20:20 ` Nirbheek Chauhan
2010-04-05 0:54 ` Mart Raudsepp [this message]
2010-04-05 10:07 ` [gentoo-dev] " Peter Hjalmarsson
2010-04-06 5:47 ` [gentoo-dev] " Rémi Cardona
2010-04-06 7:42 ` Maciej Mrozowski
2010-04-06 9:46 ` Michał Górny
2010-04-07 22:13 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
2010-04-11 23:20 ` Ryan Hill
2010-04-12 9:00 ` Petteri Räty
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1270428898.19463.6.camel@localhost \
--to=leio@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox