[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Bug status

From: Carl D. Sorensen
Subject: RE: Bug status
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:54:09 -0600

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Han-Wen Nienhuys [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:16 PM
> To: Carl D. Sorensen
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Bug status
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Carl D. Sorensen
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >> Issue attribute updates:
> >>         Status: Verified
> >>
> >
> >
> > Valentin,
> >
> > I may be wrong (after all, you're the bugmeister), but I
> think you are using status codes differently than they have
> been used in the past.
> >
> > It appears that you use "Verified" when a bug is fixed.  In
> the past, I believe that "Verified" means that the bug report
> has been found to actually be a bug, and that "Fixed" is used
> when the bug is no longer occuring.
> >
> > This is almost a complete reversal of the meaning of
> "Verified", from "It really is a bug, and I've demonstrated
> it" to "The bug has gone away".
> >
> As far as I can remember it was always like this.  Maybe the
> label name can be enhanced.

If the status "Verified" means that the bugmeister has verified that the bug 
has been fixed (as claimed by the developer when the status is changed to 
"Fixed x.y.z"), then it's my understanding that's wrong.

No need to change the terms.  I'm just wrong -- it's not the first time and it 
won't likely be the last.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]