On 01/12/2007 11:14 PM, Sander Temme wrote: > > On Jan 12, 2007, at 1:04 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> On Jan 12, 2007, at 3:33 AM, Joe Orton wrote: >> >>> What is the difference between a "RESOLVED" bug and a "CLOSED" one? Is >>> it not possible to re-open/add comments to CLOSED reports or something? >>> It's always seemed like a meaningless distinction to me, going through >>> marking stuff CLOSED seems like a spam generation exercise. >> >> >> Theoretically, issues are resolved when they are fixed on trunk >> and closed when the fix is included in any release. > > > I like this because it imposes branch management where Bugzilla itself > has none.
Sounds good to me. So far I used the following process for myself: 1. Fix on trunk => Leave state in Needinfo and add a comment with revision of fix. 2. Proposed for backport => Leave state in Needinfo and add a comment with revision of backport proposal (STATUS file) 3. Backported => Change state to "Resolved, fixed" and add a comment with revision of backport. This could be modified to: 1. Fix on trunk => Change state in "Resolved, fixed" and add a comment with revision of fix. 2. Proposed for backport => Leave state in "Resolved, fixed" and add a comment with revision of backport proposal (STATUS file) 3. Backported => Change state to "Closed" and add a comment with revision of backport. >From my personal point of view I think it is important to add the revision >number of the fix / backport to the comment because: 1. People who are interested / have the know how can easily cross check what has been changed. 2. People who only want a specific fix either because there is no newer stable version, or because they cannot do an upgrade to a later stable version for whatever reason can easily find the needed patch. Regards Rüdiger
