Use of CLOSED in Bugzilla (was) Re: [Bug 284853] ...

[Martin Klapetek]

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:26 PM, David Edmundson <
david at davidedmundson.co.uk> wrote:

> Can we continue this discussion off-bugzilla and onto our mailing
> list. It's quite interesting, but not really related to that
> bug-report.
>
> CC-ing the KDE-Telepathy (where this started), and KDE-Quality mailing
> list (where this discussion should be)
>
> Backstory for those new:
>  - there was a comment "is this bug closed" on a bug that was marked
> as resolved. In KTp we're currently treating those two states as the
> same thing.
>
> >Well, I meant CLOSED as opposed to RESOLVED. I guess you are not using
> CLOSED
> (yet?) either.
>
> As I understand it in bugzilla terms, resolved is the development team
> saying it's fixed. Closed is used when a QA team has accepted the
> patch.
>
> Is this correct?
>
> Given manpower/resources, I was under the (wrong?)  impression that in
> KDE we simply go to resolved and closed was in reality
> unused/pointless. Certainly with my developer hat on, it seems it.
>
> 1) How _should_ we be using "closed" as opposed to "resolved" in an ideal
> world?
>

Also note that bugzilla doesn't allow setting CLOSED directly, it needs to
be RESOLVED and only then can it be CLOSED. Which for our project (KDE
Telepathy), which has no real QA (assuming the usage example above holds),
causes unnecessary overhead, needing to "close" the bug twice, which in
turn leads to creating (useless) email noise. In other words - I see no
benefit of CLOSED in small projects like ours.

-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-telepathy/attachments/20120827/bc6d7d90/attachment.html>