[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Collector Status Meanings

[Chris Withers]

Chris McDonough wrote:
> at again except as a historical curiosity.  I think this may have to do
> with your definition of "wontfix", which differs from mine:

Indeed. The biggest problem really seems to be to get people to use the 
same labels for the same thing, hence my attempts at documentation.

>   Wontfix
> 
>   Bugs that are believable but that cannot be reproduced either by
>   the submitter or the wontfix'er.
> 
> I would mark this "rejected" or "pending rejection".  I'm not sure what
> "believable" means here; it's a little too fuzzy.

Agreed. I've removed this bullet point.

>   Features that don't have a champion and so are unlikely to be 
>   implemented.
> 
> I would call this "deferred".

yeah, but what does that buy us? A load of issues in a state which 
no-one looks at. This is Wontfix for me. Stuff in Wontfix is valid, it 
just Wont (be) fix'ed unless someone gets in there and digs it out. AS 
isaid to Ken, it's also slightly more provocative than "Deferred" which 
tends to float by people and we end up with issues that end up being 
fixed, but deferred issues never marked as resolved because no-one knows 
they exist ;-)

>   Changes that don't fix a bug or add a new feature, and don't have a
>   champion, or haven't see activity in a long time.
> 
> I would also call this "deferred".

See above paragraph ;-)

>>Okay, but other people don't do this, or see the difference.
>>For me, it's easy enough to page through http://collector.zope.org/Zope
>>and see the pending entries and see which ones of those have followups 
>>and which ones don't...
> 
> Really?  There's like more than 200 of them, right?  That could take a
> while.. although granted you get to know them after a while. ;-)

50 per page ;-) Personally, I set my batch size at 200 and make Zope.org 
suffer for running on Plone *grinz* Seriously though, the pattern I see 
is people pick off the important issues AS they get submitted. Tricky 
but non-critical ones tend to languish in Pending along with the other 
flotsam. These get picked off in no particular order as people bump into 
them. Stuff that was in Deferred never got touched. So for me, Pending 
and Deferred as they were, were the same. Wontfix is a more assertive 
way of saying "this ain't gonna happen" without Rejecting it...

>>Well, at least there's a wiki page describing what the states mean now. 
>>I was contemplating linking that from the followup form just below/above 
>>the radio buttons for slecting the type of followup. Should I?
> 
> I think that would be a good idea, my disagreements notwithstanding. 
> Thanks for doing this, BTW.

Maybe next bug day :-/

> If Ken added a pending rejection state, would it be reasonable to use
> that instead of deferred to mean "pending rejection"?

Sure, although it makes me cry that stuff will get slung into either 
Wontfix or Deferred with most people not knowing the difference and 
neither will ever get looked at :-/

Chris

-- 
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
            - http://www.simplistix.co.uk