On 12/3/12 7:45 AM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
New bugs are showing up in the CONFIRMED state. Shouldn't they be
UNCONFIRMED?
They should, but I don't think any humans have created bugs since the
last configuration change (the fuzz failure reporting script explicitly
sets the status to CONFIRMED).
Gerald Combs wrote:
On 12/3/12 7:45 AM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
New bugs are showing up in the CONFIRMED state. Shouldn't they be
UNCONFIRMED?
They should, but I don't think any humans have created bugs since the
last configuration change (the fuzz failure reporting script explicitly
sets the
On 12/3/12 9:06 AM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
Gerald Combs wrote:
On 12/3/12 7:45 AM, Jeff Morriss wrote:
New bugs are showing up in the CONFIRMED state. Shouldn't they be
UNCONFIRMED?
They should, but I don't think any humans have created bugs since the
last configuration change (the fuzz
On 12/2/12 4:52 PM, Bill Meier wrote:
For a bug in CONFIRMED status, the status drop-down only shows
CONFIRMED
IN_PROGRESS
RESOLVED
In particular, I wanted to change a status to INCOMPLETE.
It should be fixed now.
On 11/30/12 1:56 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Guy Harris g...@alum.mit.edu
mailto:g...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Evan Huus eapa...@gmail.com
mailto:eapa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think so. It's bothered me for a while that
Hi Gerald,
The fuzz-bot seems to be generating fuzz failures but they're not
showing up as bugs. For example the latest fuzz failure
http://buildbot.wireshark.org/trunk/builders/Clang-Code-Analysis/builds/1620/steps/fuzz-menagerie/logs/stdio
was copied to the automated captures area:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Gerald,
The fuzz-bot seems to be generating fuzz failures but they're not showing
up as bugs. For example the latest fuzz failure
http://buildbot.wireshark.org/**trunk/builders/Clang-Code-**
On 11/30/12 9:22 AM, Evan Huus wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Jeff Morriss
jeff.morriss...@gmail.com mailto:jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Gerald,
The fuzz-bot seems to be generating fuzz failures but they're not
showing up as bugs. For example the latest fuzz
On 11/30/2012 2:05 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
It looks like I should have read the release notes more closely. Fuzz
failure reporting uses the bugzilla-submit script, which requires
converting to a new status workflow in Bugzilla 4.0 and 4.2:
On 11/30/12 12:01 PM, Bill Meier wrote:
Assuming that the conversion script mentioned in
https://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/bugzilla-4-0-has-a-new-default-status-workflow/
will be run, it appears that the changes in the current status values
will be as follows:
“NEW”
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org wrote:
On 11/30/12 12:01 PM, Bill Meier wrote:
Assuming that the conversion script mentioned in
https://bugzillaupdate.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/bugzilla-4-0-has-a-new-default-status-workflow/
will be run, it appears
On 11/30/2012 4:08 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
Would UNCONFIRMED be less confusing than CONFIRMED?
I would think so. It's bothered me for a while that we didn't have a way
to distinguish between brand new, nobody has looked at it yet bugs and
solution identified, but nobody wants to work on it
On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Evan Huus eapa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think so. It's bothered me for a while that we didn't have a way to
distinguish between brand new, nobody has looked at it yet bugs and
solution identified, but nobody wants to work on it bugs.
CONFIRMED is somebody's
On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Bill Meier wme...@newsguy.com wrote:
How does the incomplete status get updated when the additional information is
provided ? manually ?
With the bug database I referred to, it was done manually by the provider of
the information.
If manually, is this OK in
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Bill Meier wme...@newsguy.com wrote:
On 11/30/2012 4:08 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
Would UNCONFIRMED be less confusing than CONFIRMED?
I would think so. It's bothered me for a while that we didn't have a way
to distinguish between brand new, nobody has looked
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Guy Harris g...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Evan Huus eapa...@gmail.com wrote:
I would think so. It's bothered me for a while that we didn't have a way
to distinguish between brand new, nobody has looked at it yet bugs and
solution
16 matches
Mail list logo
