On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 06:28:16AM +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: > > > --On 15. April 2008 17:39:26 -0300 Christian Robottom Reis > <kiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 08:25:37AM +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: >>> last night, roughly 20 tickets of the Zope 2 tracker were marked as >>> Invalid by a person (never heard its name) which is no part of the Zope >>> 2 developers group on LP. >> >> It's an unfortunate consequence of hosting bugs openly. In Launchpad we >> try to strike the right balance between making it easy for people to use >> and modify bugs and keeping the crackpots out, and in this case, it >> seems like the crackpot won. Can you tell me privately what user it was >> so I can contact him and follow up? Usually just following up with the >> end-user resolves the issue. > > I don't see why hosting bugs openly conflicts with the requirement > exposing the option to change the workflow state only to the core team > as part of bugtracker specfic configuration. The old crappy Zope > bugtracker provided that option and also my Plone-based bugtracker > software PloneCollectorNG provides several options of privacy. What I was saying is that hosting bugs openly means that anyone can come in, create an account, and modify data in your bugs. Some bugtrackers restrict the data to only appending new comments; others try a mixed model. Launchpad allows anyone to add comments and set certain statuses (and for projects like Bazaar, Launchpad itself and Ubuntu, that works out well). I take your point that configuring the restrictions per-project puts the decision in the hands of the project owner, where arguably it belongs. My point was merely that adding options is a slippery slope; check out Bugzilla's privacy options when you have a moment to see what I mean. -- Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125
This is the launchpad-users mailing list archive — see also the general help for Launchpad.net mailing lists.
(Formatted by MHonArc.)