In my opinion Patch-in-gerrit is a distinct stage in the life cycle of
a bug, and deserves its own status.
A patch-in-gerrit does not mean the same thing as assigned. Assigned
bugs are being worked on by someone. There work may or may not be
publically visible yet. They are probably not at the stage where they
want review of their work so far on the bug (obviously there are
exceptions to that for complex bugs), etc.
A patch-in-gerrit does mean that there is a fix for the bug available.
It has not been reviewed yet. It needs people to test the
patch/review/comment. It does not mean the bug is fixed (and
definitely not deployed, but I agree that is a different discussion).
If I downloaded a nightly version of MediaWiki the patch is not there.
Some people may want to look for bugs with pending patches. At the
very least, many people would want to know that there's a pending
patch when bugzilla is displaying the list of bugs in the search
window.
In different life stages of a bug, different types of love need to be
given to a bug. Thus the different stages should get different
statuses.
tl;dr /me really likes Andre's plan.
p.s. This is not the first time this has come up -
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Talk:Git/Workflow/Bugzilla
--
-Bawolff
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
