httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sander Temme <>
Subject Bugzilla flow (Re: Add 2.2.4 to bugzilla)
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:01:55 GMT

On Jan 12, 2007, at 3:33 AM, Joe Orton wrote:

>> Yes, Closed should be the final resting place for bug reports, for
>> good or for bad.
> What is the difference between a "RESOLVED" bug and a "CLOSED"  
> one?  Is
> it not possible to re-open/add comments to CLOSED reports or  
> something?
> It's always seemed like a meaningless distinction to me, going through
> marking stuff CLOSED seems like a spam generation exercise.

For me, linguistically, I mean "closed" as opposed to "open".  If  
nothing else it just sounds nicer.  Closure is good.

However, the meaning of any bug state is determined by the people who  
work with it: If "Resolved" is defined as the final resting place for  
bugs, then that is what it is.

For httpd-2, we have 1841 closed bugs, and 975 lingering in  
'Resolved'.  We clearly have different people following different  
workflows.  I browsed a couple of the highest numbered 'Closed' bugs,  
and some were closed by the reporter after we found them Resolved,  

To me, 'Resolved' has the connotation that it hasn't stopped  
twitching yet, and could still come back to life.  Once 'Closed', it  
should stay dead.

It really comes down to how we define things.  The fact that Bugzilla  
has a certain state or feature doesn't mean that we have to use it...  
we don't use 'Unconfirmed' either, do we?

As for the spam problem, Bugzilla does not send spam. If a user does  
not want to receive certain Bugzilla messages, they have fine-grained  
control over their e-mail preferences.

What I'm most unhappy about is that we have 783 bugs in New,  
Assigned, Reopened, NeedInfo... that seems like quite a lot.  Perhaps  
we need to turn on voting and start using 'Unconfirmed' as initial  


PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4  B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF

View raw message