Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:40:12 -0400 | From | Daniel Jacobowitz <> | Subject | Re: networking bugs and bugme.osdl.org |
| |
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 08:20:53PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sad, 2003-06-28 at 01:27, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > That's a trivial change to make if you want it. we just add a "reviewed" > > / "certified" state between "new" and "assigned". Yes, might be a good > > idea. I'm not actually that convinced that "assigned" is overly useful > > in the context of open-source, but that's a separate discussion. > > Most bugzilla's seem to use VERIFIED for this, and it means people who > have better things to do can just pull bugs that are verified and/or > tagged with "patch" in the attachments
GCC just calls this "UNCONFIRMED" vs. "NEW", which seems to work well. A lot of the maintainers don't look at Bugzilla at all, and a lot of the rest filter out UNCONFIRMED. A couple of interested (and dumbfoundingly dedicated) people review and confirm bugs; that's less possible with the Linux kernel, since bugs often require hardware to reproduce, but the principle is still sound.
-- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer - 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/
| |