Austin Group Defect Tracker

Aardvark Mark III

Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs
  

Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ]
ID Category Severity Type Date Submitted Last Update
0000127 [Aardvark Bugs] Aardvark Mk III Comment Enhancement Request 2009-07-31 15:20 2009-10-25 22:04
Reporter msbrown View Status public  
Assigned To
Priority normal Resolution Accepted  
Status Closed  
Name Mark Brown
Organization IBM
User Reference
Summary 0000127: Add two new statuses for Interpretations
Description We need more steps to show the status of bugs that have been sent for standards interpretation.
Desired Action Add after the "Needs Interpretation" status level, two new status levels:

  Interpretation Raised
then
  Interpretation Closed
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
(0000170)
msbrown (manager)
2009-07-31 18:06

 <via Geoff Clare>

I have thought of a problem with our intention to use additional
status codes to handle the workflow for interpretations. It
concerns what happens once bugs reach Applied or Closed status.
At that point there will be no easy way to tell which bugs were
interpretations and which weren't. To distinguish them you
would have to look at the bug history to see the sequence of
status codes it went through, or read the notes.

So, I think that adding status codes is not sufficient. We need
a new field which shows the interpretation status independently
of the main bug status. I suggest that the main bug status
codes should be:

New, Under Review, Interpretation Required, Resolved, Applied, Closed

(this is the current list minus Resolution Proposed), and the
interpretation status codes should be:

Unknown, Not Required, Pending, Proposed, Approved

Unknown would be the initial value, up until the main bug status hits
either Interpretation Required or Resolved (depending which route it
takes).

Not Required would be used for bugs that don't go down the interp
route. It would be set when the main bug status is set to Resolved,
and would stay on this value as the main bug status progresses
to Applied and Closed.

Pending would be used when the main bug status is Interpretation
Required but the interp review has not started.

Proposed would mean the interp review is in progress.

Approved would mean the interp review has completed. At this point
the main bug status would change to Resolved. The interp status
would stay on Approved as the main bug status progresses to Applied
and Closed.

(I have suggested "Proposed" and "Approved" since those are the
words used in the old interps system, but different words could be
used if desired.)
(0000173)
msbrown (manager)
2009-08-06 15:09

 group approves Geoff's solution in general; replace 'unknown' with just "-", not have a "not required" state.

Also needed as part of the bug, is retro-fitting the state on bugs already having an interp to use this new scheme.
(0000192)
msbrown (manager)
2009-08-06 21:55

 I've added the new "Interp Status" field. I am not going to remove the Status: Resolution Proposed field just yet, as I recall its original intent was for resolutions we wanted to put back out into the community for discussion.

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2009-07-31 15:20 msbrown New Issue
2009-07-31 15:20 msbrown Name => Mark Brown
2009-07-31 15:20 msbrown Organization => IBM
2009-07-31 18:06 msbrown Note Added: 0000170
2009-08-06 15:09 msbrown Note Added: 0000173
2009-08-06 21:55 msbrown Note Added: 0000192
2009-08-06 21:56 msbrown Status New => Applied
2009-08-06 21:56 msbrown Resolution Open => Accepted
2009-10-25 22:04 msbrown Status Applied => Closed

Mantis 1.1.6[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker