Re: A new axis for bugs? (was: What are our problems?)

[Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>]

Branden Robinson <branden@ecn.purdue.edu> writes:

> I like this idea, but I think it is orthogonal to the existing bug
> categories.
> 
> I don't know what you would call it, but I imagine a 4-way status switch:
> 
> unreproduced
> reproduced
> possible fix
> known fix
>
> Basically I see bug fixing as proceeding sequentially down this list.
> There's a state above "unreproduced", which is "not a bug", and you close
> it almost immediately.  There's also the state after "known fix", which is
> implementation, and is reflected by closing it or setting its severity to
> "fixed".
>
> Bugs would start out "unreproduced" automatically.  To change the status
> you be strongly encouraged to add an explanation of why, e.g.,
> 
> reproduced -> "with IMPS/2 protocol but not PS/2"
> possible fix -> (patch attached)
> known fix -> "package needs to Replace: binutils (<< 9.8.7-6)"  (or, for
>              other kinds of bugs, a patch that has been tested and known
>              to work)
> 
> I don't know about anyone else, but I would *love* this for the X bug list.

This is an excellent idea.  There are times when I just don't have time
to examine all my bugs, so being able to list all the ones that had
been promoted to one of the ``* fix'' statuses would allow me to use
the limited time available on useful work.

I know that I've missed patches in the past simply because I wasted
the time I had wading through a load of fairly worthless bug reports,
and so didn't spot the useful one including a patch etc.

This would also add a really effective mechanism for non-maintainers to
provide useful help, by finding fixes and promoting bug for the
maintainers attention, thus spreading the workload a little.

Cheers, Phil.