On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 09:19 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > Yes, that looks right. Note that I'm the maverick bugsquad guy (in > this area at least) that thinks unconfirmed vs. new & small > priority/severity changes are kinda useless (at best) and I don't > bother making these changes in most cases unless there's other stuff > that needs to be changed too. So, I'm not actually making the change, > but I want to make sure you get a response that this does look like a > correct triaging of the bug. > > Thanks for helping! > Elijah
Hi, Can you explain why you think the unconfirmed vs new change is useless? Whenever I am triaging bugs I take unconfirmed to mean that no one has looked at it, and new to mean that it has been looked at is on a todo list. I think being the reporter of a bug that remains unconfirmed is especially frustrating as you're not sure if anyone has even looked at your bug let alone working on it. Lex. _______________________________________________ Gnome-bugsquad mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-bugsquad
