On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 28/03/12 09:58, mehdi houshmand wrote: > >> > >> I wouldn’t bother. Lacking of a proper QA process, we don’t use the > >> ‘verified’ and ‘closed’ status and consider that a bug has been handled > >> once its status has been changed to ‘fixed’. > >> > >> Vincent > >> > > > > > > Not sure I agree with you there Vincent. Giving a bug a "closed" status > > allows us to perform queries, as Glenn has, to see what patches are left > > outstanding and what needs to be applied. > > I don’t see what ‘closed’ brings you in this case. You can already, > easily get the list of patches to be applied: > > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?list_id=81946;short_desc=patch;query_format=advanced;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;bug_status=NEEDINFO;short_desc_type=allwordssubstr;product=Fop > > > It also gives creates a necessary > > disparity between a [PATCH] which has "Resolved" and "Fixed" status, and > > when that patch has been applied. > > Again, I don’t see what ‘closed’ brings you. A patch has been applied > when its status has been changed to ‘resolved’. > > > Also, we are always going to lack the > > "proper QA process" so I'm not sure that argument is valid. > > Who’s going to mark the issue as closed? The reporter? I don’t expect > them to do that. The committer? This is an additional, unnecessary step > to marking it as resolved. > > Really, I don’t see what we can get out of this. > If we did have a full QA process, we would assign resolved bugs to someone to check and transition to verified state. Then one of the following would be designated to transition the bug to closed state: (1) original submitter, (2) fixer, (3) QA, or (4) PM. Leaving a bug in resolved state (according to the fixer's perspective) does not close the loop on the bug (at least in my opinion). In fact, it remains an open bug as far as bugzilla is concerned, e.g., closed bugs are displayed in strike-out style, while resolved bugs are not. The reason I am raising this now is because I am reviewing the bug list since the FOP 1.0 release in order to prepare information for a possible upcoming FOP 1.1 release. In doing this review, I found some bugs marked as resolved+fixed and others as closed+fixed. This makes it more difficult to compile and classify the status of bugs, and results in inconsistent views about the status of given bugs or FOP as a whole. I would prefer that we attempt to take the effort to allow the original submitter to comment upon resolved+fix bugs and close the bug, and, if after some time has passed (e.g., 2 weeks) without the submitter doing this, then the fixer (or any committer) may close. One reason to do this is that the original submitter may not agree that the fix actually fixes the problem they reported. If you or another committer prefers not to take the extra steps of closing bugs you have fixed, then I would be happy to close them out so you don't need to bother with it. Please let me know if you would like me to do this for you. G.
