Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ices.utexas.edu>]

> Right now, in order to change to CLOSED, you need to edit the bug two times,
> and this is suboptimal.

I wasn't even aware of this. Which might or might not indicate that the 
process is too complicated.

Regarding the existence of the two states at all: I have argued previously 
that that's unnecessary. Nathanael says that we need them for the 
otherwise lack of QA in gcc, but I think that's not correct: every patch 
for a bug should come with a testcase, so at least in theory a bug that 
has once been fixed cannot reappear because it would show up in the 
testsuite.

I get the feeling that this requirement is quite thoroughly handled. If it 
is not in some cases, then I think it is an undue burden on the bugzilla 
people if they have to maintain two states for _all_ bug reports. It's an 
undue burden because it can't be their responsibility to enforce the 
testcase rule, but they would be forced to bear the consequences.

I would also like to posit that quite a number of bugs will then stay 
RESOLVED indefinitely. If someone, say, fixes a bug on mn10200 or some 
other obscure target, who's going to double-check after a release and put 
in into CLOSED?

W.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth              email:            bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/