...The dependency tree as we use it at the moment is not meant blocking, but that's an obvious wrong usage of it and bugzilla as it reads "bug 123 blocks 456". We really should use this only for blocking issues...
I disagree, these dependency lists are very useful to quickly get a picture of where we stand.
But you're right that saying "bug 123 blocks 456" is not correct. Note that the reverse field is called "bug 456 depends on 123" which correctly represents what we mean: dependencies, not blocking.
We might be flexing bugzilla a bit (hmm....someone will certainly mention jira here) but it seems to work well, I think bugzilla is used much more now than a few months ago and find it a Good Thing.
Problem is, in a dependency page like http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/showdependencytree.cgi?id=25321 you don't see what's a blocker, what's nice to have and so on.
An easy way to fix this would be to add [BLOCKER] to the title as we already do for patches.
The official way is to use the "severity" field, but unfortunately it is not visible on the dependency tree.
...
Bugzilla provides another function to add "might be good to have it in the release": target milestones. We should just add milestones for every release and set value for the "might be good ..."-bugs.
You're right but I prefer the dependency tree because of the crossed / non-crossed bug display. And target milestones need to be changed manually a lot when bugs don't make it to the expected release.
WDYT? Where are the bugzilla admins?
Some of us have additional rights in bugzilla to be able to define products and components, see
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=107029869507213&w=2
But it doesn't mean we're the rulers of bugzilla, it's as much a community tool as everything else.
-Bertrand
