Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
4,925
edits
BMO/Workflow Proposal 2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
Some other things you might want to say would be covered by the Resolution field - "SUPPORT", "WRITE_AN_EXTENSION", etc. | Some other things you might want to say would be covered by the Resolution field - "SUPPORT", "WRITE_AN_EXTENSION", etc. | ||
===Migration=== | |||
Migrating from the current system to the above one is tricky, because it requires some guesswork as to what the next action is! Here is a straw man proposal: | Migrating from the current system to the above one is tricky, because it requires some guesswork as to what the next action is! Here is a straw man proposal: | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
Incoming bugs which are now UNCONFIRMED would come in instead as TRIAGE, and those which are now NEW would come in as DIAGNOSE. | Incoming bugs which are now UNCONFIRMED would come in instead as TRIAGE, and those which are now NEW would come in as DIAGNOSE. | ||
===Possible Issues=== | |||
From the discussion in 2009, bz raised the following issues: | |||
* What if there are multiple things that have to happen next (e.g. reviews)? (How common is this?) | |||
* If bugs are reassigned when they are to be reviewed, the person requesting review loses track of them, and therefore is less likely to go and hassle the reviewer. | |||
===References=== | ===References=== | ||
Most of this is shamelessly stolen from [http://www.squarefree.com/2009/04/20/getting-bugs-done/ Getting Bugs Done] by Jesse Ruderman. | Most of this is shamelessly stolen from [http://www.squarefree.com/2009/04/20/getting-bugs-done/ Getting Bugs Done] by Jesse Ruderman. | ||