On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 03:57:20PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote: > What exactly is the distinction between these states? > > In the past when we (Bazaar developers) did triage we would generally > set things to invalid, confirmed (if it was a bug), needs info (if we > weren't sure if it was a real bug and needed more information from > the user or a developer), or fix released (if it was already fixed). > I'm not sure where "triaged" should fit in -- is it supposed to mean > "i'm not sure if this is a bug, but if it is it's $priority"? What > action should that drive?
Triaged is different from Confirmed mainly in that you need to be a bug contact to be able to set a bug to Triaged. This is useful if you want to limit the number of people that can confirm that it's a bug. The major use case is to have a large number of people (some of maybe never have triaged bugs before, so you don't fully trust them to do a good job) triaging bugs, setting the bug to Confirmed. Then you can have a QA team that looks at all the Confirmed bugs, marks the good ones as Triaged, and the ones that need more triaging as Incomplete, pushing it back to the triagers' queue of bugs to look at. Developers then have to look at Triaged bugs, and they can be quite sure that the bug reports contain enough information. Of course you don't have to use the Triaged status at all, though. If you're happy with the way it currently works (with anyone being able to set a bug to Confirmed), you can continue having that workflow and not care about Triaged. Regards, Bjorn -- launchpad-users mailing list launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
