Peter Eisentraut <pe...@eisentraut.org> writes: > On 16.05.24 23:46, Tom Lane wrote: >> Right, so what can we do about that? Does Needs Review state need to >> be subdivided, and if so how?
> Maybe a new state "Unclear". ... > I think, if we consider the core mission of the commitfest app, we need > to be more protective of the Needs Review state. Yeah, makes sense. > So a third status that encompasses the various other situations like > maybe forgotten by author, disagreements between author and reviewer, > process difficulties, needs some senior developer intervention, etc. > could be helpful. Hmm, "forgotten by author" seems to generally turn into "this has been in WOA state a long time". Not sure we have a problem representing that, only with a process for eventually retiring such entries. Your other three examples all sound like "needs senior developer attention", which could be a helpful state that's distinct from "ready for committer". It's definitely not the same as "Unclear". regards, tom lane