Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:39:33AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Then we need to change the descriptions in the tracker. > > Sure! Just go find the source that's running code.google.com, > make a patch, submit it to google, and the next time they update > their code (maybe once every few months?) we'll be ready to roll. > >> Closes Statuses: >> >> Fixed: Developer made requested changes, QA should verify >> Verified: QA agrees with the developer >> Invalid: This was not a valid issue report >> Duplicate: This report duplicates an existing issue >> >> It is obvious that changing "Duplicate" to "Verified" would be a mistake >> since it would lose the connection to the issue linked as duplicate. > > Go tell google. > (it's already in their issue tracker, and has been for IIRC at > least three years) > >> So both with respect to the status descriptions as well with what I >> consider useful, figure me surprised. At any rate, >> <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=1&q=status%3AInvalid> >> cranks out a list of 44 "Invalid" issues. According to the stated >> policy, those should be marked "Verified" eventually. > > Yes. Actually, I thought that I was going to stop making any > devel releases if there were still "issues to verify" waiting > around, but I must admit that I haven't been checking this lately.
I can't see the reclassification of "Invalid" being listed as a duty of the Bug Squad in <URL:http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/issue-classification>. Only "Fixed" is marked with an explicit description of Bug Squad duty. On <URL:http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/bug-squad-checklists>, I find After every release (both stable and unstable): Issues to verify: go to http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=7 This _only_ lists "Fixed" issues, not "Invalid" ones. So no, we don't have _any_ policy documented that would require the Bug Squad to remark "Invalid" issues as "Verified", and I would definitely consider it a mistake if we had since the set of qualifications required for verifying "Invalid" is atypical for the Bug Squad. So what gives here? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
