Matej Cepl <mcepl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2008-02-25, 20:05 GMT, Jon Stanley wrote: > > The ASSIGNED state is a state that has a new meaning - it used > > to mean that the bug was actually assigned to a person. > > Instead, it now means that the bug is capable of being worked > > on by a maintainer - i.e. the triage team believes that this is > > a complete, actionable bug - i.e. with a stack trace for > > a crasher, various log files for other components, complete AVC > > message for SELinux stuff, etc. > > a) I totally agree not to require retooling â?? Red Hat Bugzilla > maintainers are totally buzzy with upgrading to Bugzilla 3.2 > (yay!!!) but Red Hat BZ is so heavily modified that this is > crazy amount of work. > > b) ASSIGNED state is really ambiguous, but its definition is not > what is important about it (and believe me, as a former > lawyer, I like heated discussions about definitions ;-)). To > make further discussion more understandable I will venture > with these definitions of ASSIGNED, but I repeat this is not > what's important, the further discussion is. > > So, ASSIGNED could mean: > > 1) The bug has been triaged, and the triager believe that > there is nothing she can do about it and further decisions > about the bug have to be done by developers. (Further > discussion what this actually means would be endless, so > I will skip it here). > 2) The bug has been put to the sack of particular developer(s) > and he will (sometime) work on it. > 3) The bug is actively being worked on by a particular > developer(s). > > My point is that in this discussion many people seem to confuse > 2) and 3). I don't want to indulge here in the discussion whether > there should be a special state of the bug to distinguish between > these two, because I believe that THIS IS TOTALLY OUTSIDE OF THE > WORK OF BUG TRIAGERS. Our only job is to get bug to the state 1) > (or 2) at the best -- see below), but we have no business to tell > developers what they should do. Distinguishing between 2 and 3 makes no sense. Should the bug move from 3 to 2 when the developer calls it quit for the day, and go back to 3 the next morning? -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
