It would appear bugzilla is too lame to support changing flag values +/-/? are all we get. :( https://bugs.webkit.org/editflagtypes.cgi (only accessible to bugzilla users with edit privilages).
Maybe the solution is a different review tool instead of adding flags to attachments on the bug. :( I don't think Rietveld supports any sort of flags either though. I've not looked at review board. -eric On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Maciej Stachowiak<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 17, 2009, at 1:39 AM, Mark Rowe wrote: > >> >> On 2009-06-17, at 00:41, Eric Seidel wrote: >> >>> I propose altering our bugzilla setup to have the following review >>> states (effectively adding a 4th state): >>> >>> review: >>> REQUESTED >>> DENIED >>> APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS >>> APPROVED >> >> I think "DENIED" could also do with having a hard and soft state. One to >> indicate that the approach is completely wrong, and another to indicate that >> the approach is sound but it just needs another round of improvements and >> review. >> >> Also, does Bugzilla support custom states for flags? ISTR that it only >> allows the three states and provides no means of changing their names. > > If I were to name the states, then instead of review? / review- / review+, I > would have something like: > > Review > Rejected (for the rare case where the concept of a patch tries to do is > completely wrong; often in this case the bug will also be INVALID) > Revise and Resubmit > Commit with Changes (probably this should only be used when the patch > submitter is a commiter) > Commit > > If flags won't cut it, we could try to teach bugzilla to use something else > as the basis for review, such as keywords or the status whiteboard. > > I would also like to change the names of the bug states and resolutions; I > don't know how much we are constrained by bugzilla here. > > Regards, > Maciej > > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
