[asterisk-dev] [policy] Bug Tracker Workflow Discussion

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:14:23AM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote:
> > 4) If at any point in the workflow, an issue requires feedback from the 
> > original poster of the issue, the status should be changed to 
> > 'feedback'.  Once the required information has been provided, it should 
> > be placed back in the appropriate point of the workflow.
> 
> I really wish we had a way so that the reporter could move it out of 
> feedback, but we'll have to put this on our mantis wish-list, I guess. 
> It may be worth noting that reviewing issues in feedback for updates is 
> another part of the bug marshal team duties.

Mantis doesn't do that?

The generic version of that is that the ticket is "stalled" against a
particular resource not in control of the person to whom the ticket is
assigned: the reporter, a vendor, some other third part, hardware
necessary to test something, etc, and that when that person next
comments, it unstalls the ticket, unless they say it shouldn't.

> I'll take it on as my action item to create a separate document that 
> describes the current state of all Asterisk releases, their maintenance 
> levels, and the commit policies associated with them.  It's something we 
> have needed for a while, anyway.

You guys don't actually have a Release Manager, do you?  A separate
individual whose primary job is solely to manage the current release
version of each release train, and make sure all the checklists are run
before making the announcements?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274

	     Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
	     Those who count the vote decide everything.
	       -- (Josef Stalin)