<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><style></style><div> </div> <div>----- Original Message ----- <div>From: "John Poelstra" <<a href="mailto:poelstra@redhat.com">poelstra@redhat.com</a>></div> <div>To: "For testers of Fedora Core development releases" <<a href="mailto:fedora-test-list@redhat.com">fedora-test-list@redhat.com</a>></div> <div>Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 8:00 PM</div> <div>Subject: Re: Draft for 'Bugzilla processes and procedures' mail to developers</div></div> <div><br></div>> Adam Williamson said the following on 04/02/2009 01:29 PM Pacific Time:<br>>> On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 21:22 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:<br>>> <br>>>>> Hi, -devel-list folks!<br>>>>><br>>>>> We in the Bugzappers team (part of the QA group) are working to revise<br>>>>> our Wiki space, and as part of that, various questions have arisen with<br>>>>> regards to Bugzilla procedures. A lot of the same issues have come up on<br>>>>> this list in the recent past.<br>>>>><br>>>>> In general, it seems like Fedora doesn't really have a properly defined<br>>>>> procedure for exactly how a bug should flow. Every maintainer, reporter<br>>>>> and triager has a slightly different idea of what each status or<br>>>>> resolution or keyword means, and when and by whom they should be<br>>>>> applied.<br>>>> I think you are overstating a problem that I'm not sure exists. We have <br>>>> defined the states here:<br>>>> <a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow</a><br>>>> Why not improve on what is there?<br>>> <br>>>> I think it is great you want to tackle and clarify these things. Having <br>>>> gone through a round myself with this process I guess I learned that <br>>>> some ambiguity wasn't as harmful as I first thought. :)<br>>> <br>>> You're right, of course. Somehow I'd forgotten about that flow.<br>>> <br>>> So, I will revise the draft substantially. :) Here's my quick thoughts:<br>>> <br>>> The obvious bit of hand-waviness in the graphic is the resolutions, we<br>>> don't define them (and it doesn't list some at all). DUPLICATE is<br>>> simple, and ERRATA and RAWHIDE are known: fixed bugs in official<br>>> releases are closed as ERRATA (should be done automatically), and fixed<br>>> bugs in Rawhide are closed as RAWHIDE (manually). Those we can write<br>>> down into that page without any discussion, I think.<br>>> <br>>> We do, however, need to define what 'cantfix', 'wontfix', 'notabug',<br>>> and 'worksforme' are for. We should also explicitly state which<br>>> resolutions aren't used for Fedora (I think 'deferred', 'currentrelease'<br>>> and 'nextrelease' fit into this category) so they don't get used on<br>>> Fedora bugs by mistake.<br>> <br>> Yes, I agree these were never clearly defined on the wiki page and I <br>> can't remember why, though even now I'm wondering how important it is <br>> that we use the right reason and what we would use it for.<br>> <br>>> It would really be nice, in fact, if we could have Bugzilla only show<br>>> the statuses and resolutions appropriate to the product the bug is filed<br>>> on...not sure if that's possible, though.<br>> <br>> I can ask the Red Hat bugzilla team about this.<br>> <br>> John<br>> <br>> <br>><br><br><br>In your schema for close, there is no indication that there should be or there is one more step, which is the return to originator (and perhaps others), with a notification that the bug is fixed, and ready for testing.<br><br>The end user is required to keep tabs for as long as the bug is open.<br><br>Would like email stating bug has been repaired, (if an advice has an email address).<br><br><div><div><div><div><div><div><strong><font size="1"><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">------------------</span></font><br><font size="2"><br></font></strong><style></style><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="" lang="FR-CA">Regards</span></p> </div> <div><strong><font size="2"><br></font><font size="2">Leslie</font><br></strong></div> <div><font color="green"><strong><font size="1">Leslie Satenstein</font><br></strong></font><font style="color: rgb(191, 0, 95);" size="1" color="green">5752 Avenue Lockwood.<br>Cote St. Luc Montreal Quebec H4W 1Y9 Canada<br>voice: 514-369-1685 </font><font color="green"><br></font><font size="1" color="green"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:lsatenstein@yahoo.com">mailto:lsatenstein@yahoo.com</a> </font></div></div></div></div></div></div></td></tr></table>