Backtracing, Invalidated Bugs and Quality

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Scott Kitterman wrote on 20/08/08 15:34:
> 
> On Wednesday 20 August 2008 10:31, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
>...
>>> So, if there is no suitable bug state existing already we need a new
>>> state for these kinds of bugs.  We can call it "watching", or
>>> "insufficient information", or "can not reproduce", or whatever.
>> 
>> That state already exists: it's called "Incomplete".
>
> Right, but given the current plans for auto expiration, at some point
> the difference between Incomplete and Invalid will be only a certain
> number of days, so in the end it amounts to the same thing.
>...

Sure. A bug tracker exists to help developers improve software. So when
a bug report is "Invalid", it's not because nobody ever experienced the
bug, it's because the report isn't useful in helping developers improve
the software. (Maybe "Invalid" is not the kindest word for this, but
that's a tangential issue.)

"Incomplete" is a warning that the report isn't useful in its current
state, and will soon be treated accordingly unless it's made more useful.

Cheers
- --
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIrDGE6PUxNfU6ecoRAmyPAJ9etBJszdRQB1nDfiSnOlzIMetP9ACgixEe
xJxCRwcZHTT5fDJgWxr6p6I=
=HzNA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----