mdz at canonical.com
Wed Apr 26 23:04:13 BST 2006
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 01:37:13PM -0700, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
> I hate to propose a new tag, but wouldn't an UPSTREAM tag make sense?
> If you mark your task as upstream, then it's an easy way to show that
> you have passed the responsibility in your specific task to somewhere
> else and there is nothing you can do until that somewhere else has
> done something.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'tag', here, but if you mean 'status', then I
think I may agree. There is something to be said for being able to mark a
task to say "this won't be fixed here directly, but it has been passed
further upstream and the fix (if any) will be incorporated".
I know we want to avoid having too many status values, but this would avoid
giving the impression that the bug report was refused, when in fact it was
accepted and passed on.
> That somewhere else may be visible via an upstream task in LP, or may very
> well not be visible in LP. For the later I'm thinking of a situation
> wherere let's say you have sent an email to the upstream authors, and
> they have acknowledged the problem/bug/wish, but LP is not tracking their
> BTS (if they even have one...).
Correct; compare with the email bug forwarding proposal I forwarded earlier
More information about the ubuntu-devel