Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Wikitech

Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


mah at wikimedia

Mar 9, 2012, 5:16 PM

Post #1 of 26 (2475 views)
Permalink
Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla

I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
"UNCONFIRMED" state.

Next week, I plan to begin recruiting volunteers for the "Bug Squad",
who will help me to verify bugs by testing them against the Beta
cluster. The plan is that the Bug Squad will be able to verify these
bugs and change them to the "NEW" state.

The Bug Squad idea comes from KDE's Bug Squad
(http://techbase.kde.org/Contribute/Bugsquad) and I've begun talking
with them.

If you have an interest in helping out with or participating in the Bug
Squad, please contact me.

--
Mark A. Hershberger
Bugmeister
Wikimedia Foundation
mah [at] wikimedia

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


tfinc at wikimedia

Mar 12, 2012, 1:02 PM

Post #2 of 26 (2454 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Keep in mind that MediaWiki isn't the only software that we write. We
already have a healthy beta group of Android and iOS testers. Perhaps
some of them might want to be part of a bug squad team.

--tomasz



On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>
> Next week, I plan to begin recruiting volunteers for the "Bug Squad",
> who will help me to verify bugs by testing them against the Beta
> cluster.  The plan is that the Bug Squad will be able to verify these
> bugs and change them to the "NEW" state.
>
> The Bug Squad idea comes from KDE's Bug Squad
> (http://techbase.kde.org/Contribute/Bugsquad) and I've begun talking
> with them.
>
> If you have an interest in helping out with or participating in the Bug
> Squad, please contact me.
>
> --
> Mark A. Hershberger
> Bugmeister
> Wikimedia Foundation
> mah [at] wikimedia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at wikimedia

Mar 12, 2012, 5:48 PM

Post #3 of 26 (2445 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Tomasz Finc <tfinc [at] wikimedia> writes:

> Keep in mind that MediaWiki isn't the only software that we write. We
> already have a healthy beta group of Android and iOS testers. Perhaps
> some of them might want to be part of a bug squad team.

I like the idea... Could you reply to my email titled "Bug Squad --
Activate"??

Mark.

--
Mark A. Hershberger
Bugmeister
Wikimedia Foundation
mah [at] wikimedia

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


lars at aronsson

Mar 13, 2012, 1:39 AM

Post #4 of 26 (2442 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On 03/10/2012 02:16 AM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.

This has the unwanted effect that when I click "My Bugs",
in the left menu on https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/
I don't see my bugs, because it only shows "NEW",
ASSIGNED, and REOPENED, but not UNCONFIRMED.


--
Lars Aronsson (lars [at] aronsson)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


hashar+wmf at free

Mar 13, 2012, 2:43 AM

Post #5 of 26 (2438 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Le 13/03/12 09:39, Lars Aronsson a crit :
> On 03/10/2012 02:16 AM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>
> This has the unwanted effect that when I click "My Bugs",
> in the left menu on https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/
> I don't see my bugs, because it only shows "NEW",
> ASSIGNED, and REOPENED, but not UNCONFIRMED.

Bug 35192 opened : https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/35192

--
Antoine "hashar" Musso


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


hashar+wmf at free

Mar 13, 2012, 2:46 AM

Post #6 of 26 (2436 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Le 10/03/12 02:16, Mark A. Hershberger a crit :
>
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.

While we are at it, we could even use the Bugzilla 4 default workflow:

http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html

It is not changing that much though.


> Next week, I plan to begin recruiting volunteers for the "Bug Squad",
> who will help me to verify bugs by testing them against the Beta
> cluster. The plan is that the Bug Squad will be able to verify these
> bugs and change them to the "NEW" state.

A bug squad is a great idea. We often end up with bugs that we can not
reproduce or for which we have no clear consensus.

--
Antoine "hashar" Musso


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at wikimedia

Mar 13, 2012, 4:42 AM

Post #7 of 26 (2437 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Antoine Musso <hashar+wmf [at] free> writes:

> While we are at it, we could even use the Bugzilla 4 default workflow:
>
> http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html
>
> It is not changing that much though.

I've tried to copy this. In order to do this, I had to tighten up the
"canconfirm" group. I added @wikimedia.org addresses and admin users to
the group. Let me know of any others you think should be there.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


liangent at gmail

Mar 13, 2012, 6:38 AM

Post #8 of 26 (2440 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
> Antoine Musso <hashar+wmf [at] free> writes:
>
>> While we are at it, we could even use the Bugzilla 4 default workflow:
>>
>> http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html
>>
>> It is not changing that much though.
>
> I've tried to copy this.  In order to do this, I had to tighten up the
> "canconfirm" group.  I added @wikimedia.org addresses and admin users to
> the group.  Let me know of any others you think should be there.
>

Plus people with commit or labs access?

> Mark.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

-Liangent

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at wikimedia

Mar 13, 2012, 9:05 AM

Post #9 of 26 (2438 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Liangent <liangent [at] gmail> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> I've tried to copy this. In order to do this, I had to tighten up the
>> "canconfirm" group. I added @wikimedia.org addresses and admin users to
>> the group. Let me know of any others you think should be there.
>
> Plus people with commit or labs access?

So, I can use USERINFO files for people with commit access. What can I
use for those with labs access?

--
Mark A. Hershberger
Bugmeister
Wikimedia Foundation
mah [at] wikimedia

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


p858snake at gmail

Mar 13, 2012, 2:44 PM

Post #10 of 26 (2436 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Why is it even restricted? We don't restrict closing bugs.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


happy.melon.wiki at gmail

Mar 13, 2012, 3:57 PM

Post #11 of 26 (2434 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On 13 March 2012 21:44, K. Peachey <p858snake [at] gmail> wrote:

> Why is it even restricted? We don't restrict closing bugs.
>
>
As the rising tide of bugspam demonstrates, we *should*.

--HM
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


strainu10 at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 5:29 AM

Post #12 of 26 (2430 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

În data de 10 martie 2012, 03:16, Mark A. Hershberger
<mah [at] wikimedia> a scris:
>
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.

Does this also applies to site requests? I think it shouldn't, because
these have usually been discussed extensively on the wikis.

Strainu

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


helder.wiki at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 8:50 AM

Post #13 of 26 (2427 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 09:29, Strainu <strainu10 [at] gmail> wrote:
> n data de 10 martie 2012, 03:16, Mark A. Hershberger
> <mah [at] wikimedia> a scris:
>>
>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>
> Does this also applies to site requests? I think it shouldn't, because
> these have usually been discussed extensively on the wikis.

Makes sense.

Helder

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


en.wp.st47 at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 11:42 AM

Post #14 of 26 (2425 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.

Is it possible to configure it so that reports from developers start
in the "NEW" state:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35225 and others

--
Dan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


lists at nadir-seen-fire

Mar 14, 2012, 12:00 PM

Post #15 of 26 (2427 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:50:38 -0800, Helder <helder.wiki [at] gmail> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 09:29, Strainu <strainu10 [at] gmail> wrote:
>> În data de 10 martie 2012, 03:16, Mark A. Hershberger
>> <mah [at] wikimedia> a scris:
>>>
>>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>>
>> Does this also applies to site requests? I think it shouldn't, because
>> these have usually been discussed extensively on the wikis.
>
> Makes sense.
>
> Helder

Don't we get a few site request bugs from users that haven't actually got
community concensus on them?

How about starting them as UNCONFIRMED. Then switching them to new when
someone's verified there is a concensus on them.

--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


hashar+wmf at free

Mar 14, 2012, 12:03 PM

Post #16 of 26 (2424 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Le 14/03/12 13:29, Strainu a écrit :
> <mah [at] wikimedia> a scris:
>>
>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>
> Does this also applies to site requests? I think it shouldn't, because
> these have usually been discussed extensively on the wikis.
^^^^^^^

Usually. Since sometime we have to ask for a proof of consensus, I would
prefer we keep the unconfirmed state :-]

We can probably still move a bug from unconfirmed to resolved so it is
not going to slow down site requests.

--
Antoine "hashar" Musso


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


en.wp.st47 at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 12:27 PM

Post #17 of 26 (2435 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Antoine Musso <hashar+wmf [at] free> wrote:
> Le 14/03/12 13:29, Strainu a écrit :
>> <mah [at] wikimedia> a scris:
>>>
>>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>>
>> Does this also applies to site requests? I think it shouldn't, because
>> these have usually been discussed extensively on the wikis.
>             ^^^^^^^
>
> Usually. Since sometime we have to ask for a proof of consensus, I would
> prefer we keep the unconfirmed state :-]

Agreed. Here, "confirmation" is not that the problem exists but that
the site request is:
1) Coherent
2) Something we actually do
3) Has support of the community

And hopefully bugs can be closed directly from unconfirmed to INVALID
or RESO LATER if it is found that the request either makes no sense
whatsoever, or if there is no consensus.

--
Dan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mail at tgries

Mar 14, 2012, 3:13 PM

Post #18 of 26 (2428 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Am 14.03.2012 19:42, schrieb Dan Collins:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
> Is it possible to configure it so that reports from developers start
> in the "NEW" state:
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35225 and others
+1
YESSSSSS, PLEASE
Attachments: signature.asc (0.48 KB)


mah at wikimedia

Mar 14, 2012, 7:14 PM

Post #19 of 26 (2426 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Thomas Gries <mail [at] tgries> writes:

> Am 14.03.2012 19:42, schrieb Dan Collins:
>> Is it possible to configure it so that reports from developers start
>> in the "NEW" state:
>> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35225 and others
> +1
> YESSSSSS, PLEASE

I'll add committers to the people in "canconfirm" tomorrow.

--
Mark A. Hershberger
Bugmeister
Wikimedia Foundation
mah [at] wikimedia

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


michael at movchin

Mar 15, 2012, 12:14 AM

Post #20 of 26 (2418 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

That means users in group "canconfirm" are able to create bugs with the state "New", not "unconfirmed".

-- Michael Movchin (mmovchin)

Am 15.03.2012 um 03:14 schrieb mah [at] wikimedia (Mark A. Hershberger):

> Thomas Gries <mail [at] tgries> writes:
>
>> Am 14.03.2012 19:42, schrieb Dan Collins:
>>> Is it possible to configure it so that reports from developers start
>>> in the "NEW" state:
>>> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35225 and others
>> +1
>> YESSSSSS, PLEASE
>
> I'll add committers to the people in "canconfirm" tomorrow.
>
> --
> Mark A. Hershberger
> Bugmeister
> Wikimedia Foundation
> mah [at] wikimedia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


robla at wikimedia

Mar 15, 2012, 11:29 AM

Post #21 of 26 (2413 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Mark and I just discussed this, and he's going to look into having a
"CONFIRMED" state. The flow would be:

"NEW"->"CONFIRMED"

...rather than:
"UNCONFIRMED"->"NEW"

That would also mean that all of the currently "NEW" bugs are presumed
to be unconfirmed rather than confirmed, and that we can have a
relatively clean list of bugs that someone explicitly declared to be
confirmed.

Rob

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>
> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>
> Next week, I plan to begin recruiting volunteers for the "Bug Squad",
> who will help me to verify bugs by testing them against the Beta
> cluster. The plan is that the Bug Squad will be able to verify these
> bugs and change them to the "NEW" state.
>
> The Bug Squad idea comes from KDE's Bug Squad
> (http://techbase.kde.org/Contribute/Bugsquad) and I've begun talking
> with them.
>
> If you have an interest in helping out with or participating in the Bug
> Squad, please contact me.
>
> --
> Mark A. Hershberger
> Bugmeister
> Wikimedia Foundation
> mah [at] wikimedia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


michael at movchin

Mar 15, 2012, 11:47 AM

Post #22 of 26 (2413 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Like this idea!
+1

-- mmovchin (Michael Movchin)


Am 15.03.2012 19:29, schrieb Rob Lanphier:
> Mark and I just discussed this, and he's going to look into having a
> "CONFIRMED" state. The flow would be:
>
> "NEW"->"CONFIRMED"
>
> ...rather than:
> "UNCONFIRMED"->"NEW"
>
> That would also mean that all of the currently "NEW" bugs are presumed
> to be unconfirmed rather than confirmed, and that we can have a
> relatively clean list of bugs that someone explicitly declared to be
> confirmed.
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Mark A. Hershberger<mah [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> I set up Bugzilla today so that, by default, bugs would be in the
>> "UNCONFIRMED" state.
>>
>> Next week, I plan to begin recruiting volunteers for the "Bug Squad",
>> who will help me to verify bugs by testing them against the Beta
>> cluster. The plan is that the Bug Squad will be able to verify these
>> bugs and change them to the "NEW" state.
>>
>> The Bug Squad idea comes from KDE's Bug Squad
>> (http://techbase.kde.org/Contribute/Bugsquad) and I've begun talking
>> with them.
>>
>> If you have an interest in helping out with or participating in the Bug
>> Squad, please contact me.
>>
>> --
>> Mark A. Hershberger
>> Bugmeister
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> mah [at] wikimedia
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> Wikitech-l [at] lists
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at wikimedia

Mar 15, 2012, 4:52 PM

Post #23 of 26 (2419 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Rob Lanphier <robla [at] wikimedia> writes:

> Mark and I just discussed this, and he's going to look into having a
> "CONFIRMED" state.

https://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/bugzilla-4-0-has-a-new-default-status-workflow/

describes this implementation:

UNCONFIRMED -> CONFIRMED -> IN_PROGRESS -> RESOLVED -> VERIFIED

Since "UNCONFIRMED" is used so many places, I'm worried about changing
that to "NEW".

Bugzilla 4 should have had this upgrade script run when it was
installed.

Does this workflow (+ changing all "NEW" to "UNCONFIRMED") look
acceptable to everyone?

Mark.

--
Mark A. Hershberger
Bugmeister
Wikimedia Foundation
mah [at] wikimedia

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


z at mzmcbride

Mar 15, 2012, 6:14 PM

Post #24 of 26 (2414 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> Does this workflow (+ changing all "NEW" to "UNCONFIRMED") look
> acceptable to everyone?

I don't really understand the purpose of the "unconfirmed" state other than
to create additional bugspam and bureaucracy.

A _constant_ issue in Bugzilla is that a bug is filed and then nobody
comments on it or does any follow-up with the bug filer until _years_ later.
This is the problem that I think you're trying to address? I'm still not
quite sure, but I'll assume it is. I don't see how adding more drop-down
menu options and layers of process is going to help mitigate the underlying
issue. The solution is to respond to bugs in a more timely manner with
comments and follow-up and attempts to illicit steps to reproduce.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


krinklemail at gmail

Mar 15, 2012, 9:31 PM

Post #25 of 26 (2469 views)
Permalink
Re: Re-introducing "UNCONFIRMED" state to bugzilla [In reply to]

On Mar 16, 2012, at 12:52 AM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:

> Rob Lanphier <robla [at] wikimedia> writes:
>
>> Mark and I just discussed this, and he's going to look into having a
>> "CONFIRMED" state.
>
> https://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/bugzilla-4-0-has-a-new-default-status-workflow/
>
> describes this implementation:
>
> UNCONFIRMED -> CONFIRMED -> IN_PROGRESS -> RESOLVED -> VERIFIED
>
> Since "UNCONFIRMED" is used so many places, I'm worried about changing
> that to "NEW".

So up until last month we had this workflow:
1. NEW
2. ASSIGNED[1]
3. RESOLVED
(sometimes) 4. VERIFIED
(or) REOPENED -> step 1

I understand that last week it changed to:
1. UNCONFIRMED
2. NEW
3. ASSIGNED
4. RESOLVED
(sometimes) 5. VERIFIED
(or) REOPENED -> step 2

I don't think it makes sense to use "NEW" as "CONFIRMED", because, agreeing
with [2], "NEW" is not descriptive. How about using "CONFIRMED" and dropping
"NEW" completely?

-- Krinkle


[1] The difference between a confirmed bug having an assignee and status
ASSIGNED, is that ASSIGNED means someone has it on his agenda to actively
work on. Whereas the assignee in general is just whoever is currently
watching over it. ASSIGNED and IN_PROGRESS are basically there same. Except
that "IN_PRORESS" is slightly later than ASSIGNED but using both doesn't
make sense and we're already using ASSIGNED.
[2] https://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/bugzilla-4-0-has-a-new-default-status-workflow/
[3] http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.