Re: Re: Req #10217 [NoF->Csd]: Feature

Hi, On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 08:05 -0700, Philip Olson wrote: > I added this feature [this week] because if a person assigns a bug to > themselves then a bot (which automagically does the status change) > shouldn't have the right to mark it bogus. Instead, a human should > determine what to do next. And the "No Feedback" status is considered > "Bogus" within the php.net bug tracker. I think it's common for the > assignee to simply forget about "No Feedback" bugs. The easy way to answer this is by saying: If the user doesn't provide feedback it can't be an issue for him. There are exceptions where this might not be true, which are like The Bug was set to "Feedback" even though it is verified but to have it verified on a specific system/environment. From there it was lost. I think the first case happens more often. And sending the reports out will hide other more relevant issues. > And in this particular case I think the change made by Chris clarified > the bug. Instead of "No Feedback" it's now "Closed", and mentions why > (a reference to the DateTime class). Much clearer. It's for this > reason that the bug was assigned to a human. Right, my goal was not to criticize the state change of this specific bug (#14255 might have been a better choice ;-) ) as such but to discuss the issue above. > Also, a few other [non-controversial] types were added. So for example > if a bug is assigned to a person yet has the "Open" status then they > will also receive the email. Thoughts? I consider that correct. Is it the same for "verified" and "analyzed"? This might allow a workflow which is a tiny bit better. Currently we don't really use these states and sometimes it is unclear whether a developer is working on a fix or simply as assigned as he is the "domain expert". But that is a different discussion. johannes