On 19 Apr 2014 00:47, "Ned Deily" <nad@acm.org> wrote:
On Apr 18, 2014, at 19:59 , R. David Murray <rdmurray@bitdance.com> wrote:
[...]
For the other deletions, I think think it should be obvious that we only need one resolution that says "maybe someday this will get reopened", rather than three of them.
Presumably you mean collapsing "later" and "remind" into "postpone".
Fine with me.
That seems to leave "out of date" unaccounted for. If we're in a
collapsing mood, I guess that could be covered by "fixed". +1
Further down the minimalist route, perhaps "works for me" could be
collapsed into "not a bug" as well. That distinction seems hazy enough to make it difficult to apply the two consistently.
To my mind, "works for me" is closer to "can't fix". The closest resolution we use in Red Hat Bugzilla would likely be "INSUFFICIENT DATA" - the bug report is too incomplete for us to reproduce the error or otherwise identify the actual problem (if any). Cheers, Nick.
While part of me likes the idea of having more fine-grained statuses as
we do today, in practice it is difficult to make use of them so I'm OK with consolidation.
BTW, what about the fields for existing (open and closed) issues? Would
they get mapped to the new values?
-- Ned Deily nad@acm.org -- []
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: