Soft close

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Soft close

jwalker

I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING

WAITING is a status that can be included either as a closed or open status, but will probably be treated as closed in most cases.
WAITING bugs have one special property, when a comment is added to a WAITING bug, then it is automatically placed into the OPEN state.

Broadly, this allows people to ignore bugs that are waiting on someone else.

The new WAITING status solves 2 related problems:

1. The need to follow up on needinfo? items.
A bug has no STR or more info was needed. You NI? the creator, but the bug still shows up on searches and you still need to close the bug after some length of time. With a status of WAITING however, this becomes automatic.

2. Closing a 'good' bug.
A bug has been raised that is a good idea, but you know that it's never going to happen unless someone contributes a patch, and you don't want the bug to turn up in searches unless someone does chime in. So you add a comment about welcoming contributions and set the status to WAITING


My question is really a technical one. Is this possible, and how hard is it?

Thanks,

Joe.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists+s6506n84121h51@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

Kenneth Sheppard
Joe,
At my organization we use the fixed status for what you are describing. Once a bug has been fixed someone has to go in and verify, once the verification has been done, we update the status to CLOSED Verified. If the bug is not actually fixed we will update the status to Open, Verification Failed. Typically, it's better to name statuses after the action that has just taken place (which sets the current state) as opposed to a status that describes action required to move forward. The flow is then built and shared with your team in a document.

Thank you,
Ken Sheppard
980-318-9303

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:21 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING

WAITING is a status that can be included either as a closed or open status, but will probably be treated as closed in most cases.
WAITING bugs have one special property, when a comment is added to a WAITING bug, then it is automatically placed into the OPEN state.

Broadly, this allows people to ignore bugs that are waiting on someone else.

The new WAITING status solves 2 related problems:

1. The need to follow up on needinfo? items.
A bug has no STR or more info was needed. You NI? the creator, but the bug still shows up on searches and you still need to close the bug after some length of time. With a status of WAITING however, this becomes automatic.

2. Closing a 'good' bug.
A bug has been raised that is a good idea, but you know that it's never going to happen unless someone contributes a patch, and you don't want the bug to turn up in searches unless someone does chime in. So you add a comment about welcoming contributions and set the status to WAITING


My question is really a technical one. Is this possible, and how hard is it?

Thanks,

Joe.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=kshep0010@...>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by jwalker
Hi Joe,

On 26/02/16 16:21, [hidden email] wrote:
> I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING

Can you explain (other than the comment-to-reopen) how this is different
from the existing status INCOMPLETE? It seems like people use this for
resolving things where someone is ignoring an ni? request.

The way to avoid getting searches for bugs which are a good idea but
need someone to work on them, is to have a Future milestone or similar.
Marking the bug as RESOLVED with some resolution is just going to mean
people don't find it.

Gerv

-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists+s6506n84121h51@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

ehumphries
In reply to this post by jwalker
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 8:21:29 AM UTC-8, [hidden email] wrote:
> I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING

I think this might be a better question to pose in fx-dev and dev-platform, rather than here, since this touches on how we're handling bugs in the project.

-- Emma
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists+s6506n84121h51@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

jwalker
In reply to this post by jwalker
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 5:28:43 PM UTC, Gervase Markham wrote:

> Hi Joe,
>
> On 26/02/16 16:21, [hidden email] wrote:
> > I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING
>
> Can you explain (other than the comment-to-reopen) how this is different
> from the existing status INCOMPLETE? It seems like people use this for
> resolving things where someone is ignoring an ni? request.
>
> The way to avoid getting searches for bugs which are a good idea but
> need someone to work on them, is to have a Future milestone or similar.
> Marking the bug as RESOLVED with some resolution is just going to mean
> people don't find it.


Hi,
So maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. This would be an extra entry into the list that is UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED, RESOLVED, VERIFIED, CLOSED
Rather than a resolution type (which is what I see INCOMPLETE as)

Why do I want it?
* It allows me to ignore bugs which have no STR, or for which we need more info unless someone gets back to us
* It allows me to soft close feature requests from a contributor that we don't have time for, without the brutality of RESOLVED/INCOMPLETE or RESOLVED/WONTFIX.

Joe.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists+s6506n84121h51@...>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

Byron Jones-5
joe,
So maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. This would be an extra entry into the list that is UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, REOPENED, RESOLVED, VERIFIED, CLOSED
Rather than a resolution type (which is what I see INCOMPLETE as)
as per emma's response this isn't the right list for this discussion.

this list is for bugzilla-the-product development.  you're asking for a configuration change to one install, so it should be discussed on a mozilla specific list (eg. dev-platform, fx-dev, tools-bmo).

fwiw adding new statuses to bugzilla.mozilla.org is highly unlikely to happen before a organisation-wide workflow is agreed upon.  that's a massive undertaking that emma's working towards.


-glob

--
byron jones - :glob - bugzilla.mozilla.org team lead -

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Soft close

jwalker
In reply to this post by ehumphries
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 10:25:09 PM UTC, [hidden email] wrote:
> On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 8:21:29 AM UTC-8, [hidden email] wrote:
> > I think I'd like to proposing a new bug status: WAITING
>
> I think this might be a better question to pose in fx-dev and dev-platform, rather than here, since this touches on how we're handling bugs in the project.

There are 2 questions: Is this technically feasible? and Do we want to do it?

Technical feasibility is fairly simple, so I'm asking that first. I'd hate a long dev-platform discussion to then be told "Fine but that's a complete re-write".

I'm not hearing an technical reasons why this is particularly hard, so dev-platform will be next...

Joe.
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=lists+s6506n84121h51@...>