Re: Killing off UNCONFIRMED in Bugzilla

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 18:43 +0100, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 06:20:15PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 18:15 +0100, Rick Opper wrote:
> > > Then how will project devs know if a bug is - as the status implies -
> > > not yet confirmed? It may be a problem with a single users unique
> > > setup,
> >
> > Which is still a bug, and it's still "new".
> >
> > >  or a design decision
> >
> > RESOLVED WONTFIX
> >
> > > , or caused by something specific to a certain distribution...
> >
> > RESOLVED NOTGNOME
> >
> > >  Isn't that the point of this tag?
> >
> > There are other statuses available which already cover those cases.
>
> It's useful to distinguish UNCONFIRMED and NEW. Some products in gnome
> have many hundreds bugs, and triaging all of them takes a lot of time.
> What you suggest needs to triage _all_ the bugs.
>
> For example in gedit UNCONFIRMED means that the bug is not triaged. With
> NEW, you're sure that the bug exists (or existed) and should be fixed
> upstream. For someone willing to contribute, searching in more than 400
> bugs is not really convenient. So by filtering the search results to
> include only the confirmed/NEW bugs, it's already much better (it's what
> is advised for newcomers on the gedit wiki).

Then opt-out. I can tell you that UNCONFIRMED isn't used in, at least,
gnome-shell, gnome-settings-daemon, gsettings-desktop-schemas,
gnome-control-center, totem, totem-pl-parser, gnome-desktop, gom, grilo,
or grilo-plugins.