bugzilla situation

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Alex Merry wrote:

> On 24/02/12 09:22, Thorsten Zachmann wrote:
>> Why not have a state for bugs that you know are worth fixing? Then the
>> developers can concentrate on those and Other people can do the initial
>> cleaning to get the bugs to a state they can be closed or the proper state
>> set.
>
> That would be "assigned", I'd have thought.
>
> Or perhaps "new", although bugzilla makes the assumption that all developers 
> will file "real" bugs straight away.
>

For Krita, I assume that developers know what they are doing, so I'm fine 
with bugs being set to New immediately, although I would prefer if every 
bug started out as unconfirmed.

I only mark bugs as assigned if it's clear who should work on it; until 
then, as soon as I can confirm a krita bug, it becomes "new".

I try to give every report a respons within a week, as well, and I've 
noticed that if I say "thank you for your report", reporters don't mind 
waiting for a fix,  me asking them for more information, closing the bug 
as duplicate, or telling them to get a newer version and closing the bug 
as already fixed.

It might be a little bit of social engineering, but I try to never close a 
bug as wontfix or worksforme; in those cases I close the bug as needsinfo. If the 
user gets back to me with more information, I'll thank them again and look 
at the bug again.

But I'm lucky, I'm not getting dozens of reports a day yet, and bugzilla 
is an extremely useful tool for me.

Boudewijn