OpenJDK bug database: DRAFT Developer Workflow

[Richard Bair]

On Dec 30, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:

> I have a number of issues with the proposed workflow.
> 
> 1.  At the risk of starting with a silly one, Dispatched?  Really?  Yes, everyone who has worked at Sun over time has learned what Dispatched means, but it is a constant question for newcomers, and given that one of the major motivations for a new bug system is externalizing the process so that the community can play too, we should err on the side of using terms that are understood by the community.  Every other bug system calls this "New".  Using a term that no one understands sends the wrong message about who this system is for.

Completely agree. 

> 2.  Accepted/Understood.  I think these should be merged into something like "Open".  The distinction between Accepted And Understood is a very fuzzy one; in reality there are many shades of grey between them and achieving understanding often happens gradually over time.  Having a bug transition from one to the other does not provide a great deal of additional information to external stakeholders, which is mostly the point of bug state transitions.  A good way to evaluate whether this state carries its weight is: what impact does the transition from Accepted to Understood have to non-Dev stakeholders, such as the bug submitter or QE?  I think very little, since Understood does not mean that resources have been allocated to the bug.  And the names Accepted and Understood carry connotations that are easily misinterpreted as committments to fix.

Completely agree. I don't see any value in the various "sub states" and I think you captured well the reason.

Richard