Re: Closing bugs (?)

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> On Apr 4,  4:33pm, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> } Subject: Closing bugs (?)
> }
> } Sourceforge supports the `fixed' and `closed' states. Hm, do we want
> } to leave it to one of the administrators to actually close a bug or
> } should the person who fixed (or tried to fix) it do that?
> } 
> } And why this distinction?
> 
> A bug can be closed without being fixed, i.e. "that's not a bug, it's a
> feature," or "seeming bug was caused by pilot error," etc.
> 
> The way I've typically handled it with GNATS before is that the person
> who fixes the bug changes the state to "fixed" ("feedback" in GNATS),
> and then it's up to the administrator and/or the person who reported
> the bug to agree that it's fixed and change it to "closed".
> 
> But maybe we don't need that much supervision, and maybe it's OK to
> leave a bug in the "fixed" state forever.

Hm. In this ugly Web-Interface we have (in the list), the state isn't
shown, so you can only tell if a bug is (supposed to be) fixed after
clicking on it etc. I think it would be nice to keep the list of open
bugs small -- but of course that's only really a problem when there
are more than there are now.

Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx