On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:02, Yang, Lei A <[email protected]> wrote: > [snip]
This is a topic after my own heart, having spent years looking at, and tweaking bug processes in various projects. > In my understanding, the INVALID means this is not a bug. This situation > may be caused by some behaviors (you look them as bug) are: > #1 mis-operation by users "INVALID" or "NOTABUG" seem appropriate here. If we have "NOTABUG", that's better. > #2 by design in purpose No, that's "WONTFIX"; or it's moved to the right component and then "WONTFIX" there. "WONTFIX" also encapsulates "CANTFIX" - say because a specification (which should be linked to by the person doing the resolving) overrides the user expectation. > #3 features request but we will not to support Again, "WONTFIX". Although with MeeGo being an open project there needs to be a clear separation between "WONTFIX because we paid developers don't have the time and budget" and "WONTFIX because it's the wrong approach for MeeGo". In the former case, a community member should be able to come along, provide a patch and have it adopted. Perhaps a new resolution of "NOTAPRIORITY" (or things are kept open at a low priority) needs to exist? > #4 misunderstood between user and app behavior (or you can say this is > usability bug, and this can be reported to UI design team for review) Indeed, "INVALID" is appropriate for the kind of thing of: -------->8-------- STEPS TO REPRODUCE 1) Open "Wibble". 2) Click "Open..." EXPECTED OUTCOME Application closes. ACTUAL OUTCOME File open dialogue appears. --------8<-------- Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:[email protected] | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council chair _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
