Bugzilla semantics: marking bugs as triaged

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 11:13 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:

> > This is not the theory; the primary reason for marking bugs triaged is
> > intended to be for the benefit of developers. Whether or not it works
> > this way in practice.
> 
> The benefit to the developer would be in properly assigning the bug to
> the right component, or getting enough useful information out of the
> reporter.  Such things should be evident without any other marking by a
> triager.  Either there was value added to the bug and visible to the
> maintainer, or there was nothing more to add.  In either case, the value
> to the maintainer is there whether the triager has left footprints or
> not, so it seems that the actual value of the /footprint/ is to prevent
> multiple attempts at triaging.

No, the idea is to allow developers to pay attention mainly to issues
that have been triaged. To do this they need to know which are which.
But there's not much point arguing about this, as all proposals allow it
to happen.

> Triage can accomplish all of
> their goals without ever touching the bug state.  Why spend time and
> effort fighting over something that clearly doesn't matter?

Because it's the status quo, and changing it requires either significant
upheavals in existing bugs, or a period of confusion where multiple
methods are in use. Either of these is a 'cost', so we have to
demonstrate a sufficient benefit to make it worthwhile.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net