On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Paul Poulain <paul.poulain@biblibre.com>wrote:
Le 22/02/2011 12:46, Chris Nighswonger a écrit :
Chris can correct me if I'm wrong....
Once the patch has been pushed to a QA branch it is "Pushed for QA."
If it fails QA it should be "Failed QA."
If it passes it should be "Needs sign off" or "Signed off."
Once pushed to master it is "Patch Pushed."
If at any time it fails a test the status should return to "Failed QA." That's how I read it too, but when "patch pushed", there's something in master and something that is wrong. So it should not just be "failed QA" because in this status a patch can be hidden in a middle of many other "failed QA" that have no consequences in master.
the more I think of it the more I suspect it would be a good idea to have a new status.
I understand what you are thinking now. I think if we just followed the use of the status and resolution fields (see http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/page.cgi?id=fields.html#status) then in the case you suggest we would just re-open the bug. I wonder if we are not creating solutions for a problem which is really due to a lack of utilizing solutions which already exist? Kind Regards, Chris