Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 16 Nov 2002 20:00:38 -0200 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: Bugzilla bug tracking database for 2.5 now available. |
| |
Em Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 04:54:58PM -0500, Jeff Garzik escreveu: > Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> >One thing we've done before in other bug-tracking systems was to create > >a "STALE" state (or something similar) for this type of bug. So it > >wouldn't get closed (I have seen this done as a closing resolution, but > >I think that's a bad idea), but it wouldn't be in the default searches > >either ... you could just select it if you wanted it ... does that sound > >sane? (obviously we don't need this yet, but might be a good plan > >longer-term).
> Personally... if they really are bugs, I would rather keep them open, > even in the absence of a maintainer... maybe that's not scalable, but > I would rather not auto-expire things which really are bugs. The > maintainer (or "someone who cares") may not appear until the next stable > series, for example. Vendors do that alot.
Jeff, ok, so we could do as vendors: mark the ticket as LATER, or whatever that doesnt make clearly stale tickets that nobody is looking appear on the default queries.
If somebody is _so_ interested in a particular feature he/she can look for tickets marked LATER, add comments and state that he/she is working on it, provide more info, etc.
> 'stale' may be a decent compromise if people disagree with my logic, > though...
:-)
- Arnaldo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |