Patch Statuses in Launchpad

[Martin Pitt]

Scott Kitterman [2008-05-26 16:04 -0400]:
> This is true, but it's not worth another set of tags that no one will remember 
> to use to try and get it.  
> 
> We need to stick with something very simple that is available in the U/I.

FWIW, full ack. Unfortunately my male brain is not able to keep more
than 5 tags in mind. My general experience with tags has been pretty
bad, too (except in special and rigorously enforced processes like
SRU). They are abused for all kinds of things, and used quite
inconsistently, which makes them not very useful. (I see this as a
general problem of any free-form tag system, not specific to LP.)

If I review a patch and say "no, this is wrong", then I don't see
anything wrong with removing the patch flag (assuming that it is meant
to be "a patch to fix this bug", as opposed to "a file which is in
diff -u format"). OTOH, if the patch looks ok, but I don't fully
understand it, it shouldn't be untagged at all.

Forwarding patches upstream should be displayed by adding an upstream
task.

Just my 2 c,

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20080528/236b4e60/attachment-0001.pgp