bugs audit volunteers require
truiken at gmail.com
Sat Jan 5 23:04:39 CST 2008
On Jan 5, 2008 7:02 PM, James McKenzie <jjmckenzie51 at sprintpcs.com> wrote:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> > Dan Kegel wrote:
> >>>> Maybe add a resolution of NEEDMOREINFO?
> >>> There is no need to add one more reason for a bug resolution IMHO,
> >>> INVALID with appropriate comment does the job.
> >> INVALID seems harsh, it may scare away novice reporters.
> >> Do we want to make it easy to search for bugs stuck
> >> in a needmoreinfo kind of state? If so, a keyword or state
> >> might be handy.
> >> Does anybody remember good old gnu gnats, the old bug
> >> tracking system? It was great this way; it had an explicit
> >> notion of whose ball the court was in. I miss that.
> >> - Dan
> > This is useless. Most bugs marked invalid are not Wine bugs. Only few are
> > those that reporters did not include enough information.
> I disagree. We need to have a method to let the reporter know that the
> project needs more information in order to properly troubleshoot a
> problem. Closing a reported bug as INVALID is not applicable in this
> case. If the bug is outside of the scope of the project, it should be
> marked as such. The word invalid to me means that the bug could not be
> reproduced or the information provided did not disclose a solvable
> problem OR the bug has already been fixed and that the fix will be in
> the next release. It may be necessary to add a resolution of
> NOTINPROJECT to handle those problems that are outside the scope of the
We do have a method: asking for information in a comment. Why would
you close a bug as invalid if it's fixed in the next release?
NOTINPROJECT? Invalid. Why make this even more complicated than it
already is. Just say in a comment that the bug lies with another
project and close it as invalid. In this case, invalid means 'not a
More information about the wine-devel