[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug status
From: |
Valentin Villenave |
Subject: |
Re: Bug status |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:29:09 +0200 |
2008/6/10 Carl D. Sorensen <address@hidden>:
> Valentin,
>
> I may be wrong (after all, you're the bugmeister), but I think you are using
> status codes differently than they have been used in the past.
>
You're welcome to ask, I'm (still) kind of new at this.
Graham, can you confirm the following?
> It appears that you use "Verified" when a bug is fixed. In the past, I
> believe that "Verified" means that the bug report has been found to actually
> be a bug, and that "Fixed" is used when the bug is no longer occuring.
It may be the orthodox way. I use to mark issues as "Accepted" when
I've been able to reproduce the bug. "Verified", currently, means I
have checked that the bug is fixed (or made invalid for any reason),
and that I probably won't have to look at it again.
> This is almost a complete reversal of the meaning of "Verified", from "It
> really is a bug, and I've demonstrated it" to "The bug has gone away".
Yes, this has already appeared to me at some point, but IIRC this is
more or less what I was told.
> I'm not part of the bug team, so I have only minimal input to this issue, but
> I think it's a potential source of confusion for those who use the bug
> tracker.
Could be -- but a very minor confusion then, since you're the first
one to notice :-)
Graham, we need your lights here...
Cheers,
Valentin
- Bug status, Carl D. Sorensen, 2008/06/10
- Re: Bug status,
Valentin Villenave <=
- Re: Bug status, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2008/06/10