Hi, * Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> [2010-07-30 16:48]: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:41:59 +0200, Nico Golde wrote: [...] > > While I see all these undetermined bugs... What about changing the TODO: check > > to an undetermined status? The problem I currently see is that TODO issues are > > being worked on while undetermined issues mostly end up forgotten. And > > undetermined status is pretty much what TODO: check is anyway. > > it's not quite the same since undetermined can be set on a per-package > basis, which i think is more robust/flexible. Good point! > also, undetermined issues show up in debsecan, which i use to keep track of > issues that i may be interested in working on. > > i think Moritz uses that tracking for issues that he feels clutter the > TODO page, and that is ok with me. Guiseppe and i manually check > webkit/chromium issues anyway. i would prefer to display them by > default on the per-release tracker pages, but Moritz vetoed that. > > i was planning to (when i find the time) to add <undetermined> entries > to the tracker's TODO page (with an option to hide that) to make them > more visible. also, i was thinking about including the TODO > message on that page as well to increase usability. lastly, i am > planning to update check-new-issues to stop on <undetermined> issues > even if there is no TODO (with a flag to not do that). Sounds like a good solution for the above "inconsistency". Go for it! Cheers Nico -- Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0xA0A0AAAA For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.
Attachment:
pgpRmU8BAicg5.pgp
Description: PGP signature