RFR: Filing bug, ProblemListing, Backing out [v2]

[Jesper Wilhelmsson]

On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 20:09:30 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Fixed comments from review
>
> src/next.md line 154:
> 
>> 153: #. Close the original JBS issue **(O)**.
>> 154:    * "Verify" the issue and choose "Fix Failed".
>> 155: #. If the intention is to fix the change and submit it again, create a redo-issue **(R)** to track that the work
>> still needs to be done.
> 
> I have strong objections to fix failed ever being used and oppose it being recommended here. Unless the fixer and their
> reviewers completely failed at their job what you usually have is some other problem caused by the fix and the fix
> actually succeeded.

I guess this is a question for those who normally handle fix verification and may have scripts that look for different
verifications.

There's only four values to choose from: "None", "Verified", "Not verified", and "Fix failed".
"Verified" means that the fix solved the problem and no more action is required, so this is clearly not right. "Not
verified" seems wrong since it actually was verified that the fix caused problems - or it wouldn't need to be backed
out. "None" could be used in my mind, but I can imagine that there are filters that treats "None" as issues that needs
verification. So changing to using this would probably cause problems. That leaves "Fix failed".

Maybe Joe knows why this was designed as it is?  Anyhow, it is the current process and we need to bring it up with the
right people before changing it.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/21