[Ns-developers] bugzilla proposals
tomh at tomh.org
Tue Mar 27 11:46:38 PDT 2012
On 21.03.2012 09:14, Vedran Miletić wrote:
> 2012/3/21 Tom Henderson <tomh at tomh.org>:
>> Tommaso, Daniel, and I had a discussion today about modifications to
>> tracker, which we plan to discuss at the meeting but are first
>> on the list.
>> - we need a clearer means to detect when a patch is sitting ready to
>> applied for a bug fix, but just needs review. We discussed adding a
>> status field 'PATCH PENDING' for this state.
>> - we should move bugs out of NEW state to either ASSIGNED,
>> UNCONFIRMED, or
>> VERIFIED. A bug in ASSIGNED state means that the assignee has
>> agreed to
>> produce a patch; i.e. it is not valid to assign to ns-bugs at isi.edu.
>> When in
>> UNCONFIRMED or VERIFIED but not assigned, the assignee could either
>> be the
>> existing ns-bugs at isi.edu, or a new address ns-unassigned at isi.edu,
>> would need to be created (I might suggest to just reuse
>> ns-bugs at isi.edu
>> unless a reason is provided otherwise). It could be implied that
>> 'VERIFIED' means we want a patch, or we could instead use a more
>> 'PATCH WANTED' status.
> +1 for 'PATCH WANTED'
I learned that "VERIFIED" is reserved for closed bugs, and is intended
for Q/A team to verify the resolution. I introduced a "CONFIRMED" state
instead that corresponds to Open status.
As a result, I added three new states corresponding to "Open" status:
- PATCH WANTED
- PATCH PENDING
and I have started to use these states in the tracker, and we can see
how it goes.
More information about the Ns-developers