On Tuesday 19 June 2007 18:24, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > Phillip Susi wrote: > > Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > >> If you are not a developer then it is misleading to set it to In > >> Progress because nobody is actually working on the fix and it may > >> never be fixed. > > > > There are those of us who are not developers but do still work on > > fixing bugs ;) > > > > Non developers should be able to set these states if the bug is > > assigned to them. > > I don't think you should assign a bug to yourself if you are not working > on fixing it. IMO you should try to move it along to the Triaged state > as efficiently as possible and bugs should be assigned to the developer > or dev team who is going to fix it. > > I realise that this thinking does not match current triaging policy but > IMO that policy should be changed. Too many bugs are being held up in > half-triaged states. Important bugs are sometimes not getting the > attention they should while less important ones are cluttering up the > field.
So is this imposing policy change through system updates without discussing it with those affected or were there people involved in the triaging process that were consulted? > FWIW, I'm not a developer myself, I'm simply looking at ways of making > the triage process more structured and efficient. Currently in LP assigned means this is the person who is expected to take the next step on the bug (for example when I set a bug to needs info, I generally assign it to the reporter to make this clear). I'm not sure how taking away triaging tools aligns with your stated goal? Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
