On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 00:55:50 -0700 Brian Dolbec <dol...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> For me IN_PROGRESS means the problem is being worked on, not that a fix > has been posted/committed anywhere. INVCS is once the fix has been > committed to the source repo and not anything to do with an ebuild from > the coders perspective. The problem is the overlap of bugzilla for > both ebuild repositories and source repositories. So if there is any > changes to be made to the different states possible... Just remember > the the different perspectives and try to make it clear what they are > for. Also, if a pkg is never stabilized... does that mean it's bugs > can never be closed? So far in the discussion, that point has not been > brought up, but is very relevant to the discussion. > > /me mumbles about the extra bookeeping that work-flow will > make...and subsequently put off and/or forget to do ;) As an alternative approach, we could use "RESOLVED" to mean "Committed to tree" and add a secondary stage, maybe called "VERIFIED"[1] to indicate it was shipped-to-stable ;) Thus: - RESOLVED FIXED: Fixed, but no subsequent stabilization needed ( ie: fixed straight to stable or in an ~arch only package ) - RESOLVED NEEDSTABLE: Fixed in ARCH, needs arch->~arch stabilization - RESOLVED STABLE: Status after NEEDSTABLE NB: When I said "InVCS" I meant a token stage akin to "needstable" that was seperate from the existing "InVCS" bugzilla keyword, apologies for the confusion. Because to me, Gentoo's bugzilla about "current ebuilds" should pertain to the ebuilds themselves, not to the status of upstream those ebuilds just so happen to be wrappers for 1: Ok, not really, just my joke, but something with a better name.
pgpaV7J65yJau.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
