Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:28:56AM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> <snip>
> > I'm not sure. Overall I don't think that the whole FIXED -> VERIFIED ->
> > CLOSED process is working too well for us, and I don't really see a need
> > to.
> > Why not just resolve stuff as FIXED and have it reopened if it's not
> > fixed for the reporter? That's imho much easier. It drops the explicit
> > verification step, but do we need that one?
> 
> While not everyone uses VERIFIED and CLOSED, they are handy for a proper
> bug tracking system as it is good to know that what was done to mark it
> as FIXED actually worked for the reporter. Otherwise, when someone comes
> along later and does a REOPEN we don't know if that's because the fix
> didn't really work or what.
> 
> I'd rather we tried to have people use the methods we have than change
> the methods to make it 'easier'.
 
Yeah, I realized that after writing.
In general VERIFIED + CLOSED is a good idea. The problem is that not
everyone verifies fixed bugs, so how about we define a time period after
which a bug is assumed verified and can be closed? Say a month after it
got FIXED?

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org