Bugging questions

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:54:57PM +1200, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2006, at 10:04 AM, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > ...
> > 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.
> > ...
> 
> Right, that's what "Won't Fix Here" will be for.

I'm glad that a new status has your support, but I'm not so sure about the
name.  It is a difficult idea to express in a very short status, to be
certain, but I fear that most casual users will interpret "Won't Fix Here"
as "Won't Fix", which is not the right idea.

How about something like "Passed" or "Forwarded"?

-- 
 - mdz