Community,<br><br><br>As I&#39;d mentioned in a previous thread, I think we should consider removing the custom attribute &quot;patch status&quot; from Bugzilla, and keeping track of this information in the regular Status attribute.  This has several advantages:<br>
<ul><li>Easier searching, since it&#39;s a default value, not a custom value</li><li>We can enable Workflows between Statuses</li><li>We no longer have the dependency on Priority to control the display of this critical value</li>
</ul>The Workflows allow us to specify how tickets are allowed to change status, from which to which.  Here&#39;s an example workflow:<br><ul><li>NEW (default for all incoming tickets)</li><li>ASSIGNED (to the developer working on it)</li>
<li>NEEDS_SIGNOFF (once a patch has been submitted)</li><li>SIGNED_OFF (after signoff)</li><li>PASSED_QA (once QA&#39;ed successfully)</li><li>PATCH_PUSHED</li><li>RESOLVED</li></ul>For a patch that fails testing, it would look more like this:<br>
<ul><li>NEW<br></li><li>ASSIGNED</li><li>NEEDS_SIGNOFF</li><li>FAILED QA (some obvious problem found by tester)</li><li>NEEDS_SIGNOFF (again, now that the problem is fixed</li><li>SIGNED OFF<br></li><li>FAILED QA (less obvious problem)</li>
<li>NEEDS_SIGNOFF</li><li>SIGNED OFF</li><li>PASSED QA<br></li><li>PATCH_PUSHED</li><li>RESOLVED</li></ul>
Workflows could prevent jumping a status straight from ASSIGNED to PASSED QA, for example; that status could only be reached from SIGNED OFF.  All the changes to these statuses are recorded in the bug reports history, so we have a record of the life cycle.<br>
<br>I think this is what Status was initially designed to do, so we just need to leverage it.<br><br><br>-Ian<br><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Ian Walls<br>Lead Development Specialist<br>ByWater Solutions<br>Phone # (888) 900-8944<br>
<a href="http://bywatersolutions.com" target="_blank">http://bywatersolutions.com</a><br><a href="mailto:ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com" target="_blank">ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com</a><br>Twitter: @sekjal<br>