Sure, if there's consensus on a better process, but there's clearly no consensus and I've yet to see a better argument for changing the current process than "because we're spiteful about Fremantle and don't want to face reality".

Now, you might say that enhancements should match bugs in being marked FIXED only when the code has been committed, but enhancements are different beasts, and their scope is frequently significantly larger than the typical bug, so tracking that "all appropriate code has been committed" point is much more difficult (and not a particularly useful thing to pursue).

So, enhancements are closed when they're roadmapped, and bugs are closed when the code is committed. If you can't deal with bugzilla not differentiating between hardware releases then I recommend unsubscribing from your bugmail and moving on.

I've corrected the ones I've run across (maybe a half-dozen so far), so there's probably not a whole lot of them left. Either way, the inconsistency stems from incomplete or changing information (i.e., the feature was roadmapped after the bug was resolved, whoever resolved it didn't know that the feature had been roadmapped, etc.) than an incomplete policy changeover (i.e., the person resolving knew it was planned for Fremantle but closed it WONTFIX for the current release), so it's not really relevant to this particular discussion.