This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Suggestion for a new GNATS policy
- From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt at mathematik dot uni-ulm dot de>, Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo at libero dot it>, Volker Reichelt <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>, <S dot Bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 09:28:52 -0500 (CDT)
- Subject: Re: Suggestion for a new GNATS policy
About the reconfirmed thing:
- Basically, "reconfirmed" is a list of dates of snapshots.
- I'd say everybody agrees that a good approximation to this is a list of
dates at which it was reconfirmed: we may use snapshots that are a
couple of days old, but not more. So let's make it simpler and take the
date/time of reconfirmation, since bugzilla can determine that by
itself.
- Just as much, nobody really cares about previous dates, so it would be
ok to just store the last time something was reconfirmed
Why a separate field (and why we store it in the symposis at present):
- it needs to be visible (see below why); the audit trail is not, at least
not in queries
- reconfirming should be simple; bumping a date was considered simpler
than sending an email
- by point 3 above, nobody cares about previous reconfirmations, so we'd
like not to clutter the audit trails with pages of reconfirmations.
Given the last point, I would very much dislike reconfirming a bug by
clearing-resetting the flag, since that would add _two_ more (and above
that: useless) entries to the audit trail.
My optimal solution would be a button "Reconfirmed" that I could click,
that bumps the date of a respective (queryable) field, and that otherwise
leaves no mark in what I will usually see when I look at the audit trail.
> Developers only care the bug is still valid, remember.
That's too simple, Dan. We are talking about different communities, and
the community that spends the most time with GNATS/bugzilla are what you
termed bugmasters. I tend to think they do valuable work and it would be
unfair to neglect their needs. The "reconfirmed date" information is
clearly important to them (otherwise we wouldn't go to such length to put
it into the synposis of _every single_ C++ report), so please don't make
it harder than necessary.
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/