View Single Post
qgil's Avatar
Posts: 3,105 | Thanked: 11,088 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Mountain View (CA, USA)
#11
Originally Posted by jebba View Post
They had a bug, they had a source fix, and had even pushed out a *binary* fix to the public before the status was changed. And even though they have a binary fix in the public, it is still not *CLOSED*, it is "ON_QA". Then when it hits their final repos, it gets closed.

That seems to be a very good way to do it and it seems to me that Maemo (Nokia) should look to Fedora (Red Hat) as a model because they are doing things very well and are in a similar type of situation (e.g. large corporation heavily involved in a "community" distribution).

Every time you CLOSE a bug with "fixed internally, if you don't know how to build a .deb, go wait", you annoy your customers. WORKSFORUSWAITFORITNOOB, is not the best status...
You are mixing some terminology here.

- RESOLVED FIXED means fixed. Not closed.

- VERIFIED comes after RESOLVED, if the reporter agrees on the resolution (FIXED, DUPLICATE, etc)

- CLOSED comes only after VERIFIED.

See https://bugs.maemo.org/page.cgi?id=f...tml#resolution

I don't see what adding an "ON_QA" brings in the context of bugs.maemo.org, apart from extra work.
 

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post: