Status: Resolved Later

[Christopher Hicks]

On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Kevin Benton wrote:

> I'm wondering - does it make more sense to create a pending status with 
> a reason code than to change status to resolved later because the issue 
> (if set to resolved later) in my interpretation, really isn't resolved, 
> but instead, put on the "back burner."

Why not make a priority level for back burner and not change the status?

> It seems to me that a resolved status should point to the issue is 
> resolved pending verification, and no more work needs to be done to fix 
> it.

Yes.

> Pending as a status, to me, says that work may still need to be done 
> pending some factor.

Why does pending need to be its own status?

> Pending verification doesn't seem like a good status either because it 
> suggests that the developers still have more work to do after 
> verification is done.  If more work has to be done after verification, 
> then verification must be re-done.

Yes.

> Anyway, just a few musing/ramblings on that particular process.

Musing is good.

-- 
</chris>

"Fans of Mozilla's free, open-source Firefox browser make the
ardent Apple faithful look like a bunch of slackers."
- Rebecca Lieb at clickz.com