Triaging Documentation bugs

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson]

Re: status of https://bugs.launchpad.net/serverguide/+bug/1327173

Let me summarize the background:

* The bug reporter claimed that a spot in the server guide is not
  correct.

* Peter M. asked for clarifications, and the status was set to
  "incomplete".

* A couple of days later, the bug reporter provided the requested info
  in the form of precise suggestions for changes.

* Since nobody acted after that, the bug was autoexpired due to the
  "incomplete" status.

* I happened to see that. To make sure the bug report would not be
  accidentally forgotten, I changed the status from "incomplete" to
  "triaged".

* Peter M. thanked me by disagreeing on the "triaged" status.

So why did I choose "triaged" and not "new"? Simply because I think that
the bug report contains all info that a server guide maintainer could
ever need to start working, and I found the info provided by the bug
reporter convincing. The ball is in the maintainers' court. That's what
"triaged" is about.

Quote from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Bug%20statuses :

"Triaged:
- A member of UbuntuBugControl believes that the report describes a
genuine bug in enough detail that a developer could start working on a
fix. (also see tip below)
- Use this when you are confident that it should be looked at by a
developer and has enough information"

On 2014-12-05 21:06, Peter Matulis wrote:
> On 12/05/2014 11:40 AM, Walter Lapchynski wrote:
>> ... if the Documentation Team sees some reason to have a unique
>> workflow, that's certainly something we can discuss.
> 
> I don't see any reason why we would need a special workflow.  That
> would just lead to unwarranted complications.

Excellent. Then https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Bug%20statuses applies.

> I just wanted to make sure everyone is in agreement on how to use bug
> statuses.
> 
> To recap,
> 
> 1. 'Confirmed' normally precedes 'Triage'
> 2. 'Confirmed' never follows 'Triage'
> 3. If 'Triage' is ever used before 'Confirmed' the latter is implied

No. Those points are your own invention. There is nothing at the "Bug
statuses" page which supports the idea that a bug must be "confirmed"
before "triaged". They are different beasts.

Didn't you just say that we don't need a special workflow?

Btw, a LP bug can get the status "confirmed" just by anybody out there
stating that the bug affects him/her.

> 4. The current state of 'New' is the proper one for the bug in
> question [1].
> 
> [1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/serverguide/+bug/1327173

It doesn't look new to me, but sure, if you say so. I think "triaged" is
appropriate. It's probably a matter of judgement.

-- 
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj