On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Very much so I believe. If nobody is working on a bug, no activity on it > means something hugely different from when somebody is supposed to work > on it. I personally have a query for bugs that I'm CC'ed on (which you should be CC'ed on any bugs that you triage - for the life of them) that have had no activity in 30 days. I don't have this as part of the triage process, but maybe it should be. I'm open to comments here - the point of this is good user experience, not introducing bureaucracy (although some of the latter is necessary to ensure the former). The main reason behind the use of the states that we decided is that we wanted to launch this with the minimal amount of development and retooling necessary (i.e. none). There is no such thing as an UNCONFIRMED state in b.r.c, as there is in say GNOME. This was actually specifically removed, since having it would impact RHEL workflow (and you can't specify different initial states per product in the version of bugzilla used here). VERIFIED means something entirely different - we don't use it in Fedora and don't want to. In RHEL land it indicates that the patch proposed has passed through the QE department successfully (or something close to that) and that the bug is verified as having been fixed. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
