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 ) id 1QFSqm-0001Qj-1e for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:09:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D7C51C08C; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D66B1C0B4 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vereniki.bit-level.net (unknown [83.212.183.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pchrist) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E33FC1B408B for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:06:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:06:11 +0300 From: Panagiotis Christopoulos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla - New Default Status Workflow Message-ID: <20110428150611.GA16153@Vereniki.lan> References: <4D737C71.1040806@gentoo.org> <4DB9749C.70301@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OgqxwSJOaUobr8KG" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DB9749C.70301@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: d01d053c10452091adfb97d3ae10edae --OgqxwSJOaUobr8KG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 16:07 Thu 28 Apr , Christian Ruppert wrote: > So once again: >=20 > https://bugs.gentoo.org/docs/en/html/lifecycle.html Ok, so, we should choose one of two ways: 1. The old one [1] 2. The new one [2] =46rom my point of view, the problem currently is that the ways above are mixed. A user files a bug. The bug has UNCONFIRMED status. Then, someone with editbugs priveleges tries to assign the bug. He has the NEW, ASSIGNED and RESOLVED options to change its status. A bug is assigned to a team/ maintainter. The maintainer can change its status from NEW to ASSIGNED or RESOLVED. The maintainer marks the bug as RESOLVED. He can change that status again to UNCONFIRMED, REOPENED, VERIFIED or CLOSED. Even the RESOLVED can be FIXED, INVALID, WONTFIX, DUPLICATE, WORKSFORME, CANTFIX, NEEDINFO, TEST-REQUEST, UPSTREAM, OBSOLETE. Someone would say that CANTFIX and UPSTREAM could be merged. The same with WONTFIX and OBSOLETE (it's a theory, I don't say we should do it). > ...=20 > REOPENED gone, > CLOSED gone. VERIFIED will be added. What is the meaning of VERIFIED? (I also never understood the meaning of the old CLOSED).=20 >=20 > So I think we should convert... I think we should convert to the new [2] model too. The only reason I asked about the whole "workflow thing" on irc was because sometimes I get confused by all these options. I believe we should simplify them and update the bug-wranglers guide accordingly. [1] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.6/en/html/lifecycle.html [2] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html ps: To everyone who helped with the upgrade of bugzie: Thanks guys! I can understand it wasn't easy.=20 --=20 Panagiotis Christopoulos ( pchrist ) ( Gentoo Lisp Project ) --OgqxwSJOaUobr8KG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk25gmMACgkQOsV5uRvANlZu8ACgikvRIb/Bd9624OSCBKd3xKKL Te8AoIUCkZmeKoxzvFMDko+CmH/mlNMv =GGoc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OgqxwSJOaUobr8KG--