Re: BTS: Why no "invalid" or "notabug" tag?
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> what about the middle case, i.e. "the behaviour described could be
> reproduced, but it's not a bug, or at least not our fault"?
> (Bugzilla calls this "INVALID").
>
> Often, but not always, the bug can or should be reassigned to another package,
> but then a second user might come around and submit the same bug report.
At least one of the bugs should be reassigned; you can of course clone
a bug, reassign it, make the original blocking on the reassigned bug,
and retitle the original to indicate what is the problem. [There is a
wishlist bug about adding some sort of trail that indicates that a bug
has been reassigned, but don't hold your breath for that to happen any
time soon.]
As far as what has to happen before a notabug or notbug or invalid or
yourfavoriteunsupported tag is considered (by me, anyway), see #376594
and my responses.
As a final note, using usertags to handle this sort of situtation is
quite easy:
user libmail-dkim-perl@packages.debian.org
usertag 400693 notabug
thanks
Don Armstrong
--
"I'm a rational being--of a sort--rational enough, at least, to see the
symptoms of insanity around me. And I'm human, the same as the poeple
I think of as victims when my guard drops. It's at least possible I'm
even crazier than my fellows, whom I'm tempted to pity.
"There seems only one thing to do, and that's get drunk"
-- Chad C. Mulligan (John Brunner _Stand On Zanzibar p390)
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: