Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] process for getting bugfixes and security updates into stable grimoire

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] process for getting bugfixes and security updates into stable grimoire
  • Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 12:11:43 -0500

On May 11, Arwed von Merkatz [v.merkatz AT gmx.net] wrote:
> Replying to list, you should do the same Matthew, so other's can see
> what you're writing ;)
>
> > Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> > > 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?
> > >
> >
> > Does that mean a maintainer (or whoever fixed the bug) would have to
> > remember to come back and mark the bug as VERIFIED in a month?
>
> It should be easy enough to create a bugzilla query listing all bugs
> assigned to you that are marked FIXED and haven't changed in a month so
> they can be VERIFIED/CLOSED.

My regular query for my stuff includes anything that isn't VERIFIED, so I
stay very motivated to get things verified once I fix them. :-/

Attachment: pgps0D3byckGG.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page