Hello.
There is inconsistency in the triage process for Fuel bugs superseded by
blueprints.
The current approach is to set "won't fix" status for such bugs.
But there are some cases we should clarify [0], [1].

I vote to not track superseded bugs separately and keep them as "won't
fix" but update the status back to "confirmed" in case of regression
discovered. And if we want to backport an improvement tracked by a
blueprint (just for an exceptional case) let's assign milestones for
related bugs.

If we want to change the triage rules, let's announce that so the people
won't get confused.

[0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1383741
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1422856

--
Best regards,
Bogdan Dobrelya,
Skype #bogdando_at_yahoo.com <http://bogdando_at_yahoo.com>
Irc #bogdando



__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to