Re: That need to close bugs?

[Christian Robottom Reis <kiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:03:00PM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 03:07:15PM +1200, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> >
> > And third, some teams use statuses in odd ways. For example, a while ago 
> > the Ubuntu Mozilla team were using "In Progress" when they really meant 
> > "Won't Fix" (I don't know whether they still do this). And as we've seen 
> > from the recent Incomplete fallout, some developers have been using 
> > "Incomplete" for bug reports that aren't actually incomplete.
> 
> I find it interesting that you call other ways to look at bug
> statuses 'odd', while not considering that maybe your intepretation
> sounds odd to me (and probably to others as well).

I have written a Launchpad news entry that clarifies the semantics of
bug statuses:

    http://news.launchpad.net/general/of-bugs-and-statuses

I'll be posting this to ubuntu-devel shortly so that a wider audience
can consider this.

> Anyway, I am open to look at bug statuses used by mozillateam again,
> but not before you have landed your _final_ one and only great way to
> triage bugs ;). Currently things are still moving too fast and from

There will always be potential for change, but ground zero is clarifying
what our current statuses are for. There are quite a few cases that we
need to think though carefully: for instance, what status should we use
for distro bugs that are waiting for upstream work; or what should
happen to Incomplete bugs that have information provided. I'll be
posting more news entries that try and move forward on identifying
processes to handle these special cases. Stay tuned to

    http://news.launchpad.net/category/bug-tracking

Enjoy!
-- 
Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125