On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:10:14PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> On 3/7/11 11:13 AM, Brian Harring wrote: >> > Re-read what he stated- it'll convert all existing NEW bugs to >> > CONFIRMED upon migration. There's a fair number of bugs that are in a >> > NEW state, decent number that have sat for a long while too. Those >> > bugs aren't 'confirmed'- just like with the new work flow where the >> > dev flips it from UNCONFIRMED to CONFIRMED, leave it to devs to flip >> > the current bugs from UNCONFIRMED to CONFIRMED rather than just >> > marking everything as CONFIRMED. >> >> Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but it seems we have both >> UNCONFIRMED and NEW in the "old" workflow. My understanding is that >> CONFIRMED is the new name for NEW, which makes sense. >> > Sorry but no. NEW means "Ok I think this is a bug. Can you please take a > look?". CONFIRMED is "ok this is definitely a bug. I am able to > reproduce etc and will look into fixing it". The meaning is slightly > different but it is important to distinguish valid from invalid bugs. > > > Regards, > -- > Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 >
If we were to switch to the new workflow, it probably would make sense to switch the default new bug status to UNCONFIRMED. I'm not sure how we would handle the existing bugs in NEW status. Here are the workflow diagrams for our old Bugzilla and the new one. I find pictures are a bit easier to follow. Bugzilla 2.22: http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/2.22/html/lifecycle.html Bugzilla 4.0: http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/4.0/en/html/lifecycle.html
