Launchpad bug workflow change

[Scott Kitterman]

On Tuesday 19 June 2007 18:24, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote:
> Phillip Susi wrote:
> > Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote:
> >> If you are not a developer then it is misleading to set it to In
> >> Progress because nobody is actually working on the fix and it may
> >> never be fixed.
> >
> > There are those of us who are not developers but do still work on
> > fixing bugs ;)
> >
> > Non developers should be able to set these states if the bug is
> > assigned to them.
>
> I don't think you should assign a bug to yourself if you are not working
> on fixing it. IMO you should try to move it along to the Triaged state
> as efficiently as possible and bugs should be assigned to the developer
> or dev team who is going to fix it.
>
> I realise that this thinking does not match current triaging policy but
> IMO that policy should be changed. Too many bugs are being held up in
> half-triaged states. Important bugs are sometimes not getting the
> attention they should while less important ones are cluttering up the
> field.

So is this imposing policy change through system updates without discussing it 
with those affected or were there people involved in the triaging process 
that were consulted?

> FWIW, I'm not a developer myself, I'm simply looking at ways of making
> the triage process more structured and efficient.

Currently in LP assigned means this is the person who is expected to take the 
next step on the bug (for example when I set a bug to needs info, I generally 
assign it to the reporter to make this clear).

I'm not sure how taking away triaging tools aligns with your stated goal?

Scott K