OpenJDK bug database: DRAFT Developer Workflow

[Joe Darcy]

On 12/14/2011 12:01 PM, Iris Clark wrote:

[snip]

>> Though where it says;
>>
>> "Sufficient investigation has been preformed to gain a basic understanding
>> of how this bug/feature request should be addressed. There is no requirement
>> that an actual solution be known at this time."
>>
>> this matches more with "Cause known" than "Fix Understood".
> The definition I provided does not adequately describe what one should expect
> for this status; hence my question immediately after that line:
>
> "The definition of this status should match the current
> definition/expectation for "Fix Understood".  What is that definition?
>
> Is it sufficient to remove the final sentence?  Perhaps it should be replaced
> with a recommended confidence level?
>
> "Sufficient investigation has been preformed to gain a basic understanding
> of how this bug/feature request should be addressed and the associated risks."
>
>> I really like what we currently have in terms of:
>> - cause known (problem has been identified)
>> - fix understood (a solution seems to have been devised)
>> - fix in progress (actively implementing the solution)
>>
>> As an IE (and someone who watches many new bug reports) I will often take a
>> bug to "cause known" as part of my initial eval. Combining an understanding
>> of the problem with the discovery of a solution into one state loses very
>> important information in my opinion. For example, a bug with an understood
>> fix can be easily picked up by a new developer as a "starter" bug.
> I agree that when we remove statuses, information may be lost.
>
> I had combined these two statuses because my impression was that they were not
> currently being used effectively.  What seems to happen in many cases is that
> once sufficient investigation has been done to identify the cause, the
> recommendation for a solution would be known as well).
>
> What experience do other people have with these statuses?

Looking over the 100+ open bugs where I'm the responsible engineer, I 
have about 1/3 in accept state, 1/3 in cause known, and 1/3 in fix 
understood.

Should these three related conditions about an increasing understanding 
of the bug be covered in one state with three substates?

>> I don't think "closed: future project" works very well. Once a bug is
>> closed it should remain closed in my view. Maybe a new substatus of
>> "accepted" could be "future project" to indicate deferral?


I believe the intention of  "closed: future project" state is intended 
to more neatly address issues like a "Java should have a module system" 
bug, filed back in 1996.  Leaving these is a chronic accepted or cause 
known state for years obscures other issues.

-Joe