This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
- From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>
- To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: neroden at twcny dot rr dot com, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:52:21 -0500 (CDT)
- Subject: Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
> I think it would be better to have some automatic VERIFIED->CLOSED
> cron job, which gives the originator N weeks to reject the fix.
We get the majority of reports against _releases_, not snapshots. If
something's fixed in a snapshot, it might be half a year or more until the
originator get's to check whether the bug is fixed. I also get the
impression that most people just use what's on their system, and then it
might be even longer until she upgrades.
Asking the originator for confirmation that a bug is fixed is plain
impractical.
I see us dreaming up complicated schemes to make use of the three-state
thing in bugzilla. I would really like that people keep in mind the cost
of maintaining it. Please, everyone, we should realize that we're not
Microsoft that can throw 100 people at a problem. We just don't have them
and I personally will not have the time to close bugs in a two-step
process. I can make much better use of my time, and I also have the
impression that bugzilla has a lot of places where I can spend it on more
useful things that following an overly complicated workflow.
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/