Re: Suggestion for a new GNATS policy

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>]

On Monday, May 12, 2003, at 06:59  AM, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:

> On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 12:16:06AM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > > We confirm each bug many times, and every time we bump the date 
> > > field.
> > > How
> > > are we supposed to do this in Bugzilla?
> >
> >
> > That's the easy (for me) way:
> > You can unset-reset the flag.
>
> How am I supposed to store the fact that I reconfirmed a bug with a
> two day old cvs-Snapshot?

By putting it in the comments?

Developers only care the bug is still valid, remember.

> > It records *every* time the flag was set, not just the first time.
> > It's trivial to query for all bugs where the flag has not been set in
> > the past x days.
>
> Again, if we can query for the field in questions, that's nice, but
> its much more important IMHO that this information is visible in the
> result of a query.

Add it to your default visible query result columns.

> > I just need to know *what* type of query you want to do on this flag,
> > so i can make it appear on the query form for you (for your
> > convenience, since you can constructs queries the hard way using the
> > boolean charts).
>
> Being able to do text queries would suffice. The imporant thing is, 
> that
> this information is visible in the result of a query.
This is something *you* control, not me.

> That's exactly why we put it into the synopsis: It SHOULD show up in 
> queries
> at least if I request this when doing a query.
> If conversion is a problem, I hereby volunteer to extract a list 
> containing
> PR number and desired contents of the "last-confirmed" field for all 
> open
> PRs at the time of the switch over to bugzilla. This way you'd only 
> have
> to feed this to an SQL-query once.
>
>    regards  Christian
>
> --
> THAT'S ALL FOLKS!