On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:24:32PM -0800, Marek Szuba wrote: -> -> On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:29:35 -0800 -> "C. Titus Brown" <[email protected]> wrote: -> -> > This sounds like a tracker process that I don't know about. So the -> > idea is to go from 'Fixed' to 'Verified-Fixed'? -> Correct. Moreover, issues which have been closed but not verified can -> easily be listed from the issue tracker (select "issues to verify" from -> the drop-down list), which makes it easier to spot what needs testing.
Two thoughts -- first, if we plan to do things this way (New -> Accepted -> Started -> Fixed -> Verified) then we should move 'Fixed' from the Closed Issues Status Values list to the Open Issues Status Values list. This makes all of the 'fixed' issues appear in the default tracker list. I've done this just now so you can see the effect. second, I would prefer to institute a "needs review" tag to emphasize that the proposed patch needs code review by someone other than the primary author. In other words, replace "Fixed" with "NeedsReview". comments? cheers, --titus -- C. Titus Brown, [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pygr-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pygr-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
