Re: Massive bug expiration spree

[Curtis Hovey <curtis.hovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 12:59 -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:04:04PM -0400, Curtis Hovey wrote:
> > > If the bug report is good, it should move rapidly to Confirmed. It's not
> > > meant to stay in the Incomplete status; other uses of Incomplete are
> > > incorrect (and I'll write a doc about this early Monday to clarify).
> > 
> > Am I right in my understanding that Incomplete is being used to indicate
> > that some party Needs Information? That isn't right for bug status, but
> > I acknowledge that is a valuable status for work. Should we be
> > considering a new work status field for states like In Planning, In
> > Development, In Review, Needs Information. The latter two imply no work
> > can be done until party provides feedback.
> 
> Well, the former 3 are substates of In Progress. A generic Needs
> Information is orthogonal to what status the bug is in, and that's why
> capturing it in a status is a bad idea. Incomplete has very specific
> semantics -- it means that there is not enough information to decide
> whether this is a bug or not; usually this means we are waiting for the
> reporter to provide said information.

Right. Exactly what I mean by it is work status. I should have added
that while I value it, workflow is a dodgy business to undertake. I
think tags might be the a viable recourse to indicate additional
information.

-- 
__Curtis C. Hovey_________
http://launchpad.net/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part