Re: Indicating the resolution of a closed bug report
Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> writes:
> I would guess (and in my case, I know) that the people who do this are
> using it for some standard indication of the “resolution” of the bug
> report. That is, answering the question “What was the state of the bug
> when this report was closed?”
> The usual case would be “fixed”, so that can be assumed in the absence
> of such information. But for reports closed *without* a “fix”, it would
> be good to indicate that, probably with standard tags. Do they exist?
There are tags, and there is the closed status. They are entirely
independent in the Debian BTS, except that you can't set tags on archived
bugs. So if a maintainer wishes to use tags for that purpose, there's
certainly nothing stopping them.
The Debian BTS already distinguishes effectively (IMO) between bug reports
that were closed because they were fixed and bug reports that were closed
for other reasons, usually because they were invalid. Bug reports that
are closed because they were fixed are closed indicating a version of the
package in which they were fixed, and the BTS knows that the bug is still
present in older versions. I personally therefore don't feel a need to
use additional tags to distinguish between various closed states for my
packages.
My personal experience is that doing more than distinguishing between
closing a bug because it was fixed in a particular version or versions and
closing a bug for some other reason for all versions is busy-work that I'd
rather not bother with. The distinction between WONTFIX, INVALID, and
WORKSFORME in Bugzilla, for instance, is a distinction I've never seen
much utility in drawing. This is just my personal opinion for my own
packages.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: