On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 14:36 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 1:59 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > So... this conflicts with the RHEL workflow, in that NEW is used
> > for 'no one is looking at this', and ASSIGNED means 'someone is
> > on the hook for that'. I'd prefer something like:
> >
> > UNCONFIRMED -> NEW -> ASSIGNED
>
> Yep, but we don't currently have an UNCONFIRMED state. One thing that
> we didn't know was whether or not you could assign different initial
> states per product - so that RHEL bugs don't wind up in UNCONFIRMED,
> etc.
>
> > If no one is currently looking at it, I think 'NEW' conveys that
> > better to the user than 'ASSIGNED'.
>
> It does, but like John said, we were looking to launch with a minimal
> amount of effort and retooling, and using what we already had.
(I'm usually just a lurker on discussions like this, but I couldn't
resist.)
NEW -> CONFIRMED -> ASSIGNED ?
>
>
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
