Re: Bugzilla outstanding issues

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Dan Winship <danw helixcode com> writes:

> >         trash   - Bug report was closed because it was crap/useless etc.,
> >                   set this keyword to distinguish it from other closed
> >                   bug reports so we can exclude them in queries
> 
> Bugzilla already has this. You mark the bug "INVALID" rather than
> "RESOLVED".

Hmmm, I think INVALID is also too pejorative - or at least for
everything that Martin probably was lumping here.

A Netscape crash bug report is possibly INVALID (but a bug, even if it
isn't _our_ bug), but what about a backtrace of some unidentified
GNOME app from Red Hat 6.1 ... that's not an invalid bug. Sure, its
not a useful bug report, but the person has a valid problem with
GNOME.

Having separate resolutions NOTGNOME/INCOMPLETE/OBSOLETE is quite
possibly overkill, but unless we stem the tied of bugs falling into
these categories, quite possibly useful.

[ Actually, Red Hat uses NOTABUG instead of INVALID, which is
  marginally more polite, but less general ]

Otherwise, we need some nice, non-pejorative term that covers
all of these situations, and then let people know with the comment
what the situation is. 

The worst possibly thing to happen is that someone's computer
crashes, they write up a few paragraphs in frustration, and then
they get an email notification a few days later:

 - STATUS: UNCONFIRMED
 + STATUS: RESOLVED
 + RESOLVED: INVALID

We also should think about canned replies for bug reports that
aren't about GNOME telling the reporter where they should go to
report the bug.

Regards,
                                        Owen