Heya, On 11.08.2010 22:24, Vincent Untz wrote: > Agree. I think most developers just don't care about UNCONFIRMED vs NEW. Hm. I see that it's good to have an easy to understand and easy to use system. While I appreciate to be able to distinguish between UNCONFIRMED and NEW, I wouldn't defend it much. I'm not that much of a maintainer after all. > Users do care and don't understand while bugs stay UNCONFIRMED, so the > current situation just leads to some confusion. > Well. IMHO, if somebody expects a bug to be NEW but it's not, then there should either be an explanation (discussion on devel mailinglist first, NEEDINFO?, ...) or it should be set to NEW. I wouldn't go that far and say that it's users that don't care or don't understand. As for bug 542087, I do think that's it a NEW bug. It was reproduced by the maintainer after all. Hence I call the expectation of the user and the critique valid. If anybody wants to uphold the proposal, namely to remove UNCONFIRMED entirely, then I think we should ask actual maintainers (on d-d-l?). It would be nice to ask some users, too, as they are probably the largest group using the bugzilla, but I wouldn't know how to get hold of them easily. For the record: I am against that change because I don't see a problem in the current implementation and doing the proposed change creates a lot work which binds a lot of time. Cheers, Tobi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature