https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39399
--- Comment #14 from Krinkle <[email protected]> 2012-10-10 21:25:20 UTC --- Afaik the current workflow is as follows (regardless of likely-outdated documentation): * Keyword usage on open bugs: "patch" means there is a proposed patch that (may) fix this bug. Depending on review status, it may or may not be reviewed yet, but presence of this patch should indicate that there is no need for a new patch by a new participant (the existing participants will proceed review/improvement/submit/merge process, and if it leads to a dead-end the patch is marked obsolete and the keywords removed). For patches in bugzilla "patch" is used for indicating presence and "patch-reviewed" as way to review it. For patches in gerrit "patch-in-gerrit" is used for indicating presence of the patch and review status is handled on Gerrit instead. As far as I'm concerned we could merge "patch" and "patch-in-gerrit" as they indicate the same thing for as far as we care for queryability. The "patch" checkbox in the attachment handling is interesting, if that can be queried then that is probably superior than using a keyword, however then one would have to OR search between "attachments not marked obsolete with 'patch'-flag" and "keyword patch-in-gerrit". "patch-need-review" is obsolete imho with patch && !patch-reviewed. "patch-need-review" and "patch-reviewed" are only used for bugzilla patches. * Keyword usage on resolved bugs is not consistent. Some remove then, some leave them. Either way, in queries we always usually exclude resolved bugs anyway. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
