REMIND and LATER considered harmful [was Re: RESOLVED]

Benton, Kevin kevin.benton at
Thu Jul 14 20:51:21 UTC 2005

>From a process monitoring perspective, "NEEDINFO" by itself isn't enough
from my point of view.  There are other reasons a bug may be in a
PENDING state besides a need for additional information.

Kevin Benton
Perl/Bugzilla Developer
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.

-----Original Message-----
From: developers-owner at
[mailto:developers-owner at] On Behalf Of timeless
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 12:12 PM
To: developers at
Subject: Re: REMIND and LATER considered harmful [was Re: RESOLVED]

Gregary Hendricks wrote:
> For this we, as well as a number of bugzillae, have implemented a
> NEEDINFO status. Along with it we have an added field of who we
 > need information from (reporter, last commentor, or someone else
 > entirely) who is then CC'd on the bug for the duration that the bug
 > is in the NEEDINFO state. This places the responsibility of the bug
 > squarely on the shoulders of the info provider until they come back
 > with the additional information. This really helps in the processing
 > of a bug as it is obvious by the status that no work can be
 > completed until someone (usually the reporter) comes back with
 > something more than was initially provided.

i much prefer this (both ideally and having seen it) over all the other 
forms suggested in this thread.

To view or change your list settings, click here:

More information about the developers mailing list