On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 17:59 -0400, Christopher Beland wrote: > Well, I was trying to clearly articulate an alternative that would *not* > involve a Triaged flag, only the three states NEW, TRIAGED, and > CONFIRMED. Ah, I see - sorry, I'd lost the thread. > I probably won't be at the meeting, and I don't have a strong opinion > about whether to use a flag or a state. The upside of using a flag is > that "triaged" and "confirmed" can be indicated separately. The > downside is that certain UI stuff that's geared toward states would need > to be improved to also indicate flags in order to maintain convenience > for triagers. (Which might be useful to do anyway, since NEEDINFO > visibility is convenient for triagers.) Yeah, lack of visibility in search results (for e.g.) is a bit of a pain with keywords. (I'd rather use a keyword than a flag, here; flag doesn't fit the use case). > The upside of using only states is that there are fewer permutations to > worry about. The downside is that procedurally, any bug that is > confirmed-but-not triaged would just need to be triaged on the spot when > it was marked CONFIRMED. > > > Bugs without sufficient information have not been triaged. Ensuring > > sufficient information is present in the report is one of the most > > important parts of triage. > > Well, I agree that *requesting* missing information is an important part > of triage. I suppose there are some bugs that you need an explanation > from the reporter before you can make heads or tails of them. But > normally, once the checklist has been completed and a request for any > missing info has been filed, I pretty much consider the triage over. > Either the reporter will add the requested info and the package > maintainer can take a look, or they won't and it will continue to be > marked NEEDINFO. If they unset the NEEDINFO flag without supplying the > requested info, or if their reply indicates further triage action is > needed (e.g. it's now clear the bug is reported against the wrong > component) I'll get an email, so in the meantime there's no need for the > bug to show up on my "not triaged" list. I assume it's clear to > maintainers they might not be able to take action on bugs marked > NEEDINFO, though in many cases they can. Well, I find that as a matter of course on many bugs, you have to go through a round or two of interaction with the reporter to make sure the information is fully available. But overall I don't really disagree, you're right that requesting info is the important step. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
