On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 03:04:27PM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > I've written a piece at > > http://news.launchpad.net/general/of-bugs-and-statuses > > that describes the intended semantics and existing behaviour for > Launchpad bugs. I'd love to hear your questions and comments about cases > which we don't handle well so we can better improve the way the tool > works. I have a couple of minor comments: Ubuntu sets Fix Released when the fix has been uploaded, although it isn't necessarily generally available to users yet (because it may still need to build, be mirrored, etc.). I think this is the right workflow (we don't want to have to mess around gardening intermediate states for the sake of the couple of hours it typically takes, or have to concern ourselves with the semantics in the event that the upload fails to build on some subset of architectures), but perhaps the text could be qualified a little bit here. You say that "Won't Fix" should only be used by the project lead. This is a little too strong when applied to a distribution; there are plenty of situations where "Won't Fix" may reasonably be applied by an individual developer rather than the Technical Board. It should certainly only be used by developers, though. Otherwise, this seems like a pretty good overview. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx]
This is the launchpad-users mailing list archive — see also the general help for Launchpad.net mailing lists.
(Formatted by MHonArc.)