On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Bernie Innocenti <ber...@codewiz.org> wrote: > Well, it's customary to introduce an additional state where the bug is > fixed in the developer's intentions, but not yet QA'd: > > NEW -> ASSIGNED -> FIXED -> CLOSED
Bernie, 99% of my commits are "working on it, mate" ;-) It's not about turning the "quality knob", is about claiming that I "fix" or "close" something way before I know whether this commit fixes it or not. To recap: writing the commit msg happens very early in the process. Claiming to fix or close a bug at that time is... preposterous. I'll normally have tested it on my machine, but will ask the bug reporter to confirm it works for them and ask him/her to close the bug if they are happy with the fix. The Debian workflow, specially "Closes", is geared for the work of a _packager_, who is likely to be applying a well known and tested patch from upstream. So the packager can say with decent confidence "Closes". A packager that merges in new code and puts "closes" immediately in the changelog is acting blinded by his own ego. Given the track record of Debian, that is unlikely to happen :-) cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
