Changes to the bugzilla workflow: 2 proposals

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Luigi Toscano wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I would like to propose two changes to the Bugzilla workflow for our instance
> on bugs.kde.org. The two proposals are totally independent from each other.
> 
> a) use the "needinfo" flag instead of the NEEDINFO status.

I wouldn't like that. I'm with Martin here -- NEEDINFO is an essential part of
my workflow, and I'm not interested in fine-grained asking info from one particular
person in the bug thread.

> 
> This is implemented on various instances of bugzilla (mozilla.org, redhat.com,
> opensuse.org) and allows the requester to set a needinfo on one or more
> specific user.
> 
> 
> b) change back the initial state from UNCONFIRMED to NEW.
> 
> This was the default until Bugzilla 3. But Many of our developers don't really
> use the UNCONFIRMED->CONFIRMED transition and this confuses the users.
> Moreover, NEW is still the initial status on various bugzilla instances.
> I would introduce an ASSIGNED state so that developers that want to mark that
> they have acknowledged it and they are going to work on it can do it.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 

I'm fine with adding NEW, my workflow currently misses a stage between UNCONFIRMED
and CONFIRMED that means "I looked at the bug report, but couldn't confirm, and
I don't want to look at it again any time soon", so going from NEW to UNCONFIRMED
to CONFIRMED would be good for me. I don't need an ASSIGNED stage, I don't even
assign bugs these days; as soon as someone starts to work on them, I make a
phabricator task.


-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org