Re: Bug status

[Graham Percival]

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:29:09 +0200
"Valentin Villenave" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 2008/6/10 Carl D. Sorensen <address@hidden>:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> It may be the orthodox way. I use to mark issues as "Accepted" when
> I've been able to reproduce the bug. "Verified", currently, means  I
> have checked that the bug is fixed (or made invalid for any reason),
> and that I probably won't have to look at it again.

That's the way it's always been in lilypond.  It's not terribly
intuitive, but lilypond has been consistent in this.

Carl: think of "verified" as "QA has verified the claim made by
the devel team".  (such claims are generally either "fixed" or
"invalid")

Cheers,
- Graham