Subject: Re: Suggested bug categories
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Mon Mar 12 2001 - 20:15:36 CST
At 07:02 PM 3/12/01 -0600, Sam TH wrote:
>Mozilla does this too, and I think did it before Eazel existed. :-)
>Search for "libpr0n" in bugzilla.mozilla.org to see their project
>tracking for the new image library.
Hmm. I did the search, but I don't understand what I'm supposed to be
seeing here.
>> >However, I think it conflicts with the goal of
>> >getting rid of TODO as a category. For example, where else would you
>> >suggest that I locate the 1.0 and 0.9 tracking bugs?
>>
>> Please explain. If we have milestone support, then I don't see the
>> conflict. For example, we could easily say that all of the following work
>> "should" get done for 0.9:
>
>See the following two bugs, which is what I was actually referencing:
>1221
>1222
Huh? What do these bugs do? It's totally non-obvious what a "tracking bug"
is. Is the intent to have a single work item (ship 0.9) to focus all the
dependency graph stuff on?
If so, then it seems like it'd be easier to just do a query to see whether
there's any remaining work for a given target milestone. When there's
nothing left, you're done.
Hot, warm, or cold? :-)
Paul
PS: If you're using Mozilla.org as a precedent, they manage to file these
tracking bugs (whatever they are) without a TODO category to park them in.
I suspect we could easily do the same.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Mar 12 2001 - 21:32:00 CST