Nathan L. Adams wrote: > I'm assuming that this would only apply to cases where the dev has
provided a fix (in most cases I assume they would have reproduced the problem). The reporter's test would have the benefits mentioned above, and if the Team Lead tested, they could review the fix for technical correctness, etc.
Again, my suggestion attempts to improve the process farther down stream; the problem of validating new bugs and tagging them appropriately is a separate matter.
Ah, okay. You're talking about patch review. Now this makes sense. I've always considered the Verified status to be indicative that a third party has been able to reproduce the bug, not that a fix has been "approved". My mistake.
--de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
