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 1NyBPX-00018x-RJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 22:01:48 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2E3AE093E; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:01:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com (mail-qy0-f180.google.com [209.85.221.180]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F71E0091 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:01:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk10 with SMTP id 10so202347qyk.26 for ; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:01:40 -0700 (PDT) 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 Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.229.46.11 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 15:01:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1270330558.15538.4.camel@keitaro.perronet.esiee.net> References: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org> <1270330558.15538.4.camel@keitaro.perronet.esiee.net> Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 15:01:40 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8ad572e359950636 Received: by 10.229.88.193 with SMTP id b1mr6407363qcm.27.1270332100714; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla? From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 272f2285-b1fb-458b-b98c-f725047ca686 X-Archives-Hash: b00a3df48979aaea416b054d5fa2121c 2010/4/3 Gilles Dartiguelongue : > Le samedi 03 avril 2010 =C3=A0 12:50 +0300, Petteri R=C3=A4ty a =C3=A9cri= t : >> 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 ? Thats why I think a bugzilla LATER keyword is just as effective; but people doing bugzie searches would no longer exclude these types of bugs on accident. -A > > -- > Gilles Dartiguelongue > Gentoo >