Mailing List Archive

Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla
Hi folks,

Currently, we have a 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla, it contains 339 bug
reports over all the products, see:

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_id=57731&resolution=LATER&product=CiviCRM&product=Cortado&product=dbzip2&product=Kate%27s%20Tools&product=Logwood&product=MediaWiki&product=MediaWiki%20extensions&product=mwdumper&product=mwEmbed&product=Wikimedia&product=Wikimedia%20Mobile&product=Wikimedia%20Tools&product=Wiktionary%20tools&product=XML%20Snapshots

The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.

To me, it seems that bugs that are labeled LATER should either be labeled:
1) WONTFIX, which I guess is the majority of these bugs
2) WORKSFORME, I am sure some things have been fixed
3) NEW, it is a real bug / feature request.

So why not do a mass change from LATER to NEW, and give them a fresh pair
of eyes? and remove the LATER option from Bugzilla.


Best,

Diederik
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Currently, we have a 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla, it contains 339 bug
> reports over all the products, see:
>
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_id=57731&resolution=LATER&product=CiviCRM&product=Cortado&product=dbzip2&product=Kate%27s%20Tools&product=Logwood&product=MediaWiki&product=MediaWiki%20extensions&product=mwdumper&product=mwEmbed&product=Wikimedia&product=Wikimedia%20Mobile&product=Wikimedia%20Tools&product=Wiktionary%20tools&product=XML%20Snapshots
>
> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>
> To me, it seems that bugs that are labeled LATER should either be labeled:
> 1) WONTFIX, which I guess is the majority of these bugs
> 2) WORKSFORME, I am sure some things have been fixed
> 3) NEW, it is a real bug / feature request.
>

LATER means we can't or won't do it (right now) but that is
likely to change in the future. WONTFIX implies "no and this
is not likely to change"

WORKSFORME is unrelated.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
But then the bug should be NEW, nobody is checking for a bug that is marked
LATER. I mentioned WORKSFORME because i suspect that some of the LATER bugs
have been resolved by now.
Diederik


On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Chad <innocentkiller@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Currently, we have a 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla, it contains 339 bug
> > reports over all the products, see:
> >
> >
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_id=57731&resolution=LATER&product=CiviCRM&product=Cortado&product=dbzip2&product=Kate%27s%20Tools&product=Logwood&product=MediaWiki&product=MediaWiki%20extensions&product=mwdumper&product=mwEmbed&product=Wikimedia&product=Wikimedia%20Mobile&product=Wikimedia%20Tools&product=Wiktionary%20tools&product=XML%20Snapshots
> >
> > The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and
> so
> > nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
> >
> > To me, it seems that bugs that are labeled LATER should either be
> labeled:
> > 1) WONTFIX, which I guess is the majority of these bugs
> > 2) WORKSFORME, I am sure some things have been fixed
> > 3) NEW, it is a real bug / feature request.
> >
>
> LATER means we can't or won't do it (right now) but that is
> likely to change in the future. WONTFIX implies "no and this
> is not likely to change"
>
> WORKSFORME is unrelated.
>
> -Chad
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>



--
<a href="http://about.me/diederik">Check out my about.me profile!</a>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:
> But then the bug should be NEW, nobody is checking for a bug that is marked
> LATER. I mentioned WORKSFORME because i suspect that some of the LATER bugs
> have been resolved by now.
> Diederik
>

If there's some that are LATER and should be WONTFIX or WORKSFORME,
we can change them. Changing them all to NEW is a bad idea though, and I
think LATER has a purpose so we shouldn't get rid of it.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
If you suspect that a bug has been fixed or is now invalid, then ask
that question in the bug.

But I agree that "later" really ought not to be a resolution (because
really a bug marked LATER has not been resolved), but rather a status or
prioritization. When I do searches across all the open bugs, I do not
habitually say "and also ones that are Resolved but only if they've been
marked Resolved--Later". And probably most people are making the same
omission.

Mark H., what do you think? Also, is there a way to make Bugzilla's
default search include resolved bugs with the Later resolution?

--
Sumana Harihareswara
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation


On 11/29/2011 02:02 PM, Diederik van Liere wrote:
> But then the bug should be NEW, nobody is checking for a bug that is marked
> LATER. I mentioned WORKSFORME because i suspect that some of the LATER bugs
> have been resolved by now.
> Diederik
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Chad <innocentkiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> Currently, we have a 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla, it contains 339 bug
>>> reports over all the products, see:
>>>
>>>
>> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_id=57731&resolution=LATER&product=CiviCRM&product=Cortado&product=dbzip2&product=Kate%27s%20Tools&product=Logwood&product=MediaWiki&product=MediaWiki%20extensions&product=mwdumper&product=mwEmbed&product=Wikimedia&product=Wikimedia%20Mobile&product=Wikimedia%20Tools&product=Wiktionary%20tools&product=XML%20Snapshots
>>>
>>> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and
>> so
>>> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>>>
>>> To me, it seems that bugs that are labeled LATER should either be
>> labeled:
>>> 1) WONTFIX, which I guess is the majority of these bugs
>>> 2) WORKSFORME, I am sure some things have been fixed
>>> 3) NEW, it is a real bug / feature request.
>>>
>>
>> LATER means we can't or won't do it (right now) but that is
>> likely to change in the future. WONTFIX implies "no and this
>> is not likely to change"
>>
>> WORKSFORME is unrelated.
>>
>> -Chad
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Sumana Harihareswara
<sumanah@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> If you suspect that a bug has been fixed or is now invalid, then ask
> that question in the bug.
>
> But I agree that "later" really ought not to be a resolution (because
> really a bug marked LATER has not been resolved), but rather a status or
> prioritization.  When I do searches across all the open bugs, I do not
> habitually say "and also ones that are Resolved but only if they've been
> marked Resolved--Later".  And probably most people are making the same
> omission.
>
> Mark H., what do you think?  Also, is there a way to make Bugzilla's
> default search include resolved bugs with the Later resolution?
>

Yes. Went ahead and did this now to include dupes too.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:45:23 -0800, Diederik van Liere
<dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Currently, we have a 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla, it contains 339 bug
> reports over all the products, see:
>
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_id=57731&resolution=LATER&product=CiviCRM&product=Cortado&product=dbzip2&product=Kate%27s%20Tools&product=Logwood&product=MediaWiki&product=MediaWiki%20extensions&product=mwdumper&product=mwEmbed&product=Wikimedia&product=Wikimedia%20Mobile&product=Wikimedia%20Tools&product=Wiktionary%20tools&product=XML%20Snapshots
>
> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and
> so
> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>
> To me, it seems that bugs that are labeled LATER should either be
> labeled:
> 1) WONTFIX, which I guess is the majority of these bugs
> 2) WORKSFORME, I am sure some things have been fixed
> 3) NEW, it is a real bug / feature request.
>
> So why not do a mass change from LATER to NEW, and give them a fresh pair
> of eyes? and remove the LATER option from Bugzilla.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Diederik

This -> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18082
Is not really WONTFIX, nor FIXED, nor WORKSFORME... and do you really want
it marked as an open bug when it won't be implemented at all for ages
until browsers actually have feature support that would make it possible
to implement?

Sounds like a bad way to make our list of open bugs grow in a needless way
and cloud up real bug reports we can and want to fix, with bug reports
that won't be fixable for quite awhile due to external sources.


--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On 29 November 2011 19:45, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:

> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>

I would interpret 'LATER' as 'this bug should be re-evaluated after a
certain period of time'.

Following this train of thought, a LATER bug should have a re-evaluation
date planned, after which it is changed back to NEW. This probably is not
possible, but I think it makes sense to change LATER bugs to NEW after,
say, a year or so.

Merlijn
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On 29 November 2011 19:43, Daniel Friesen <lists@nadir-seen-fire.com> wrote:
> This -> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18082
> Is not really WONTFIX, nor FIXED, nor WORKSFORME... and do you really want
> it marked as an open bug when it won't be implemented at all for ages
> until browsers actually have feature support that would make it possible
> to implement?
>
> Sounds like a bad way to make our list of open bugs grow in a needless way
> and cloud up real bug reports we can and want to fix, with bug reports
> that won't be fixable for quite awhile due to external sources.

The reason WONTFIX, FIXED and WORKSFORME don't make sense is because
that isn't a bug, it's an enhancement request. Perhaps the solution is
to not include enhancements in the list of bugs by default. It's
natural that enhancement requests will sometimes sit around for ages
before they get implemented, that doesn't mean we should mark them as
resolved when they aren't.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Merlijn van Deen <valhallasw@arctus.nl> wrote:
> On 29 November 2011 19:45, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
>> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>>
>
> I would interpret 'LATER' as 'this bug should be re-evaluated after a
> certain period of time'.
>
> Following this train of thought, a LATER bug should have a re-evaluation
> date planned, after which it is changed back to NEW. This probably is not
> possible, but I think it makes sense to change LATER bugs to NEW after,
> say, a year or so.
>

Reviewed perhaps, but not necessarily marked back to NEW unless we
actually plan to take action on it.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
I agree, currently the LATER acts as a blackhole and there is no structured
process to re-evaluate these kind of bugs.

I have done a lot of reading of these bugs and many were filed 3 to 5 years
ago, I think it's better to say WONTFIX then to suggest that this is
something that is going to be fixed.
It is about expectation management :)

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Merlijn van Deen <valhallasw@arctus.nl>wrote:

> On 29 November 2011 19:45, Diederik van Liere <dvanliere@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and
> so
> > nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
> >
>
> I would interpret 'LATER' as 'this bug should be re-evaluated after a
> certain period of time'.
>
> Following this train of thought, a LATER bug should have a re-evaluation
> date planned, after which it is changed back to NEW. This probably is not
> possible, but I think it makes sense to change LATER bugs to NEW after,
> say, a year or so.
>
> Merlijn
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>



--
<a href="http://about.me/diederik">Check out my about.me profile!</a>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
I'm going to take a little of my review time today and go over the LATER
bugs looking for anything that needs closing or reopening.

-- brion
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:56:53 -0800, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 29 November 2011 19:43, Daniel Friesen <lists@nadir-seen-fire.com>
> wrote:
>> This -> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18082
>> Is not really WONTFIX, nor FIXED, nor WORKSFORME... and do you really
>> want
>> it marked as an open bug when it won't be implemented at all for ages
>> until browsers actually have feature support that would make it possible
>> to implement?
>>
>> Sounds like a bad way to make our list of open bugs grow in a needless
>> way
>> and cloud up real bug reports we can and want to fix, with bug reports
>> that won't be fixable for quite awhile due to external sources.
>
> The reason WONTFIX, FIXED and WORKSFORME don't make sense is because
> that isn't a bug, it's an enhancement request. Perhaps the solution is
> to not include enhancements in the list of bugs by default. It's
> natural that enhancement requests will sometimes sit around for ages
> before they get implemented, that doesn't mean we should mark them as
> resolved when they aren't.

No. We have plenty of enhancement requests that don't fit into WONTFIX,
FIXED, WORKSFORME, or LATER. And we don't want to make those disappear,
those are valid bugs to keep open.

The reason why WONTFIX, FIXED, and WORKSFORME doesn't fit that bug is
because it's dependent on external systems implementing functionality in
order for us to be able to implement the feature. Hence, LATER when they
are implemented.

--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Diederik van Liere" <dvanliere@gmail.com>

> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.

I would assume that "LATER" is, in a release after this one... and that
the proper solution is to do as you suggest (stripe them back to NEW)
*after the next release is cut*.

Anyone think that's a bad idea?

Do we have a "Target release" in our BZ?

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
I'm noticing that a lot of the RESO LATE bugs are requests for
extensions or site requests which either:
1) We aren't currently installing that extension (Ok for these to be RESO LATE)
2) The original requester needs to provide further information

Do we want that second category to be resolved later? If so, we're
going to be waiting a long time for people to come back with more
details. Should bugs that are resolved later because the original
requester or someone else needs to provide more info instead be closed
invalid, or something else?

--
Dan Collins

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Diederik van Liere" <dvanliere@gmail.com>
>
>> The question is, when is LATER? Technically, these bugs are not open and so
>> nobody will ever see them again and that's how they will be forgotten.
>
> I would assume that "LATER" is, in a release after this one... and that
> the proper solution is to do as you suggest (stripe them back to NEW)
> *after the next release is cut*.
>
> Anyone think that's a bad idea?
>
> Do we have a "Target release" in our BZ?
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra@baylink.com
> Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Collins" <en.wp.st47@gmail.com>
> Do we want that second category to be resolved later? If so, we're
> going to be waiting a long time for people to come back with more
> details. Should bugs that are resolved later because the original
> requester or someone else needs to provide more info instead be closed
> invalid, or something else?

Isn't there a CLOSED MOREINFO?

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dan Collins" <en.wp.st47@gmail.com>
> > Do we want that second category to be resolved later? If so, we're
> > going to be waiting a long time for people to come back with more
> > details. Should bugs that are resolved later because the original
> > requester or someone else needs to provide more info instead be closed
> > invalid, or something else?
>
> Isn't there a CLOSED MOREINFO?
>

It's possible to enable a NEEDINFO or similar status, but it's custom when
it exists.

-- brion
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
Sumana Harihareswara <sumanah@wikimedia.org> writes:

> Mark H., what do you think?

Since I'm usually thinking about priority of bugs, I'm not sure why I
would resolve a bug LATER rather setting its priority to LOWEST.

But since I tend not to look at RESOLVED bugs or anything below NORMAL
priority, I don't think we need to get rid of LATER, either.

Of course, I'm reflecting only on Bugzilla's usefulness to me. LATER
doesn't get in the way of my day-to-day work, so I have no opinion on
it.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> writes:

> Do we have a "Target release" in our BZ?

We've begun using Milestones in Bugzilla for this. One of the
milestones is "Mysterious Future". I think you should feel free to use
that instead of LATER.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark A. Hershberger" <mhershberger@wikimedia.org>

> Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> writes:
> > Do we have a "Target release" in our BZ?
>
> We've begun using Milestones in Bugzilla for this. One of the
> milestones is "Mysterious Future". I think you should feel free to use
> that instead of LATER.

I love this, and am promptly stealing it for my own.
-- j
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: Dropping the 'LATER' resolution in Bugzilla [ In reply to ]
So today I have read about a 100 LATER marked bug reports and I do think we need the LATER resolution, but I would suggest to limit it's use case to only those bugs were an external constituent, either the Wikipedia community or a third-party software developer, needs to take an action and *then* we need to actually follow up on that. So this would, IMHO, exclude the following type of bug reports:

1) We do not currently have enough resources (is not a good reason to label it LATER)
2) A bug that is dependent on another bug (is not a good reason to label it LATER)
3) Bug reports that only dependent on upstream but do not require any action after it has been fixed should not be labeled LATER


I am not sure how to handle bug reports that require a major architectural overhaul, not a big fan of LATER but not quite sure if there is a better alternative.


Best,


Diederik


On 2011-11-29, at 8:35 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark A. Hershberger" <mhershberger@wikimedia.org>
>
>> Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> writes:
>>> Do we have a "Target release" in our BZ?
>>
>> We've begun using Milestones in Bugzilla for this. One of the
>> milestones is "Mysterious Future". I think you should feel free to use
>> that instead of LATER.
>
> I love this, and am promptly stealing it for my own.
> -- j
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
> Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l