[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fwd: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases

On Sun January 6 2008, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2008 12:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno wolff to> wrote:
> > Is there a preference on which version number(s) should be used if a
> > problem exists in more than one version? Is it documented somewhere?
> One bug == one problem with one version.  Use the clone feature of
> Bugzilla (IMO, we need to solidify this at FUDcon - adding to my list
> at [1].  Anyone should feel free to edit this.

Imho having a bug cloned up to four times is too obfuscating / unclear, but 
having another mechanism to track for which releases a bug is there would be 
nice, e.g. additional flags:


"?" unfixed
"-" wontfix
"+" fixed
" " unclear, whether it needs to be fixed.

Then when F9 is released and the bug is still open:
copy status from fixedRawhide to fixedF9
One month later, when F7 is EOL:
remove fixedF7 flag.
In case now all flags are "+" or "-", e.g. because the issue was fixed in F8 
and F9 / Rawhide, close the bug with an explanation, that one needs to update 
the release to fix the bug.

Opposite to cloning bugs, this would keep the discussion of the bug in one bug 
reports instead of possibly splitting it through differen reports. Another 
possibility would be to use keywords, e.g. FixedF7 UnfixedF7 WontfixF7.
This would even work without someone needing to reconfigure Bugzilla.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]