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-40934-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1OCuwq-0003Zc-5m
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 14 May 2010 13:29:04 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01B31E083C;
	Fri, 14 May 2010 13:29:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from amun.cheops.ods.org (amun.cheops.ods.org [82.95.138.191])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575B7E082B
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 14 May 2010 13:28:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from tefnut.cheops.ods.org ([2001:888:1022:0:211:24ff:fe37:e46e] helo=gentoo.org)
	by amun.cheops.ods.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <grobian@gentoo.org>)
	id 1OCuwX-0008TK-4M
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:28:45 +0200
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 15:28:27 +0200
From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Does anyone use the VERIFIED status in bugzilla?
Message-ID: <20100514132827.GA940@gentoo.org>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <4BED4602.6040700@gentoo.org>
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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4BED4602.6040700@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (Darwin 8.11.0, VIM - Vi IMproved 7.2)
Organization: Gentoo Foundation, Inc.
X-Content-Scanned: by amun.cheops.ods.org (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV
X-Archives-Salt: a8e1213f-c16d-40ae-8f35-64bf1a5172bd
X-Archives-Hash: e800e8eddbc35b76bc4dd84c68daf8ea

On 14-05-2010 12:45:54 +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Following Petteri's thread last month about RESOLVED LATER and given a
> issue that has been reported to User Relations about the "ab"use of the
> VERIFIED status in Bugzilla, I'd like to get some feedback from fellow
> developers.
> We have a user that has been marking resolved bugs as verified following
> his actions on other bugzilla(s) and he quotes the Bugzilla Docs[1] to
> explain his actions. Some developers have become upset because of the
> "spam" email that action causes.
> It seems to me the reason those developers got upset is that they don't
> value the VERIFIED status so I wonder if anyone uses that status or if
> we should just drop it. If possible and useful, would we like to
> restrict the VERIFIED status change to a specific group of people?
> Please share your thoughts on this so we can decide how to act on this case.

I'm all for removing it from the workflow.  I take a opportunistic
approach, assuming that the reporter (or someone else with the same
problem) will reopen the bug if it turns out a fix wasn't good enough or
something.


>  [1] - http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.4/en/html/lifecycle.html

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level