Directing submitter to use upstream channels instead

[David Allouche]

On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 17:54 +0800, James Henstridge wrote:
> On 08/03/06, Corey Burger <corey.burger at gmail.com> wrote:
> > From a purely social standpoint, I find the term Rejected to be a bad
> > one. In an environment where we are trying to encourage people,
> > rejectng anything is bad idea and not be taken lightly. I also think
> > Worksforme is terrible wording as well, due to the implied statement
> > about the reporter.
> >
> > However, that being said, I am stuck for a nice wording on this.
> > NotUbuntu seems to me to be the best that has been suggested, as it
> > says nothing about the reporter.
> 
> Remember that the bugtask statuses are shared by all tasks (upstream
> products, distro packages, etc).  A "Not Ubuntu" status does not fit
> very well for non-Ubuntu bugs, which is a problem.

How serendipitous (does that word exist?)

I just said on #launchpad that I thought it would be useful to define
custom bugtask status set for distributions and products.

not-ubuntu is a good example of something that is only relevant to
Ubuntu.

Also, I have already been asked what fix-committed and fix-released are.
It has a very specific and useful meaning for Launchpad and probably
Ubuntu, but is not useful to many small projects that do not really do
releases, or that just cannot be bothered into maintaining this level of
status granularity.

This would probably be a large task, and definitely needs a lot more
design than that sort of hand-waving, but I am not aware of any public
document recording whether that is considered a desirable feature.
-- 
                                                            -- ddaa
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/launchpad-users/attachments/20060308/92f516e3/attachment.pgp