[RFD] Milestone usage (Re: [Bug 422849] Re: Incorrect conversions in 2.0rc1 and bzr.dev)

[Vincent Ladeuil]

>>>>> "martin" == Martin Pool <mbp at canonical.com> writes:

<snip/>

    martin> This is especially true if you consider that bugs can
    martin> be reopened, or thought to be reopened but not
    martin> actually need further fixing, etc.

Yup.

<snip/>

    martin> It shouldn't be; it'll be a month after 2.0,
    martin> approximately.

Yeah right, add 3.0 in the mix then, the point was that sometimes
the one fixing the bug may be unclear about the target.

But like you say below, that can addressed later.

<snip/>

    martin> I do think it would be interesting to have a script that helps them
    martin> reconcile the set of fix-released untargeted bugs with the set in
    martin> NEWS.

Ok.

<snip/>

    martin> That's true, there is another approach:

    martin>  * target bugs to whichever final release (eg 2.1, 2.0) they will block
    martin>  * at the time of marking a bug fixed, retarget it to the rc or
    martin> release in which it was actually released, if that's different

Right, perfect with me. As long as the right milestones exist :-0
If not, then well, the script above can address the remaining bad
targeted ones and if not, well we *have* badly targeted bugs, no
harm done, still fixable :)

<snip/>

    martin> Well, obviously, you see the bugs targeted at a
    martin> particular milestone by looking at the milestone.

    martin> The question is, what do you really want to know by asking that
    martin> question?  

I wanted to see the bugs targeted at the series :>

    martin> Those were the things I was trying to break out in my
    martin> previous mail.  Another way to look at it is:

    martin>  * Is the release blocked? Check the milestone page for open bugs.
    martin>  * Are there any critical bugs I should do as the highest priority?
    martin> Check the critical bugs page.
    martin>  * What will be fixed in the next release?  Check the milestone page
    martin> for closed bugs - but this has the slight drawback that you may care
    martin> about bugs fixed in any of 2.0.*, but that's a bit hard to represent
    martin> at the moment.

Not a big deal, We also have (and you mentioned it on IRC) a
little tension between the NEWS sections and whether we want to
conflate the rcs sections when releasing final.

That's a bit different there and I think the consensus is that
nobody really care about keeping the distinction in the NEWS
file at release time.

        Vincent