RESOLVED/... (was RE: We have a QA Manager!)
kevin.benton at amd.com
Tue Jul 12 14:37:05 UTC 2005
> Benton, Kevin wrote:
> > Don't forget, many also rely on existing bug numbers so migration
> > need to include turning off auto-increment for the bugs table during
> > migration.
> Urk - please, no :-) We can't try and match bug numbers up. That way
> lies madness.
> A better solution would be for a bug which is RESOLVED MOVED to
> automatically redirect to the new bug in the new Bugzilla... but
> some people wouldn't like that.
EWWW! Since you brought it up, I think this RESOLVED/LATER and
RESOLVED/... for things that really don't resolve the issue should be
changed to something that tells the real story, especially for process
monitoring software. It's difficult to handle "stopping the performance
clock" properly with RESOLVED since it doesn't always (in Bugzilla) mean
the issue is truly resolved. Also, our process dings people when things
get reopened, so having them go to RESOLVED/LATER then to an active
status dings the assignee for "not handling the bug properly the first
It seems we ought to look this whole thing over from a process
Advanced Micro Devices
The opinions stated in this communication do not necessarily reflect the
view of Advanced Micro Devices and have not been reviewed by management.
This communication may contain sensitive and/or confidential and/or
proprietary information. Distribution of such information is strictly
prohibited without prior consent of Advanced Micro Devices. This
communication is for the intended recipient(s) only. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender, then
destroy any remaining copies of this communication.
More information about the developers