On Dienstag, 27. Februar 2018 23:56:57 CET Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 23:17:02 CET Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > > On martedì 27 febbraio 2018 21:06:04 CET, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 20:39:31 CET Elvis Angelaccio wrote: > > >> Exactly. Also, what Luca said: unconfirmed gives the impression that we > > >> don't care about the bug. > > >> > > >> My point is that confirmed/unconfirmed adds more problems than it > > >> solves. > > > > > > Note _again_ that I am NOT asking for keeping unconfirmed/confirmed to > > > stay > > > like it is with those terms. What I _need_ is another state. To > > > repeat, I need > > > > > the following states: > > Ok, let's try: > > > * bug is reported, nobody has looked at it. > > > > NEW? REPORTED? > > > > I like Reported because is also used by the Qt bug tracker. > > > > > * bug is reported, somebody has looked at it, but the bug > > > cannot be resolved > > > or confirmed at this point > > > > TRIAGED? > > > > Do you want this kind of bugs to show up by default in the list of bugs? > > > > > * bug is confirmed, but not resolved yet > > > > OPEN or CONFIRMED, either would work I think. > > > > > * bug is resolved in one way or another. > > > > CLOSED or RESOLVED, same as above. > > > > Sorry for the caps lock :p > > Yes, any of those would be fine, and yes, TRIAGED would not be "resolved", > so it should show up in the list of open bugs. NEW, TRIAGED, CONFIRMED, > RESOLVED would be best, I guess -- but I have no hard preferences. There's > some technical difference between RESOLVED and CLOSED, but nobody actually > seems to CLOSE bugs?
Joining the game a bit late, but this would work for me as well. -- Regards Thomas Baumgart ------------------------------------------------------------- 'Never underestimate the determination of a kid who is time-rich and cash-poor.' -- Cory Doctorow: Little brother -------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
