[Zope-Coders] Collector Status Meanings

[Chris Withers]

Ken Manheimer wrote:
>   Pending: Issues that have not yet been settled or assigned to some
>            supporter, and warrant attention.
> 
>            Your description, "issues that haven't been considered", 
>            assumes that issues are always assigned or settled when they
>            are examined, while i think some issues can remain in the 
>            pending state awaiting resource availability.

Yep, I agree with this, sorry clumsy wording on my part. How does the 
current version looked?

>   Accepted: Issues that some supporter(s) has responsibility for resolving
>             it, and it is not yet resolved.
> 
>             Your description says that some supporter has assessed the 
>             issue as warranting repair, and later says that the the issue 
>             has an assigned supporter.  I think it's a lot clearer to
>             directly say that an accepted issue has a supporter 
>             responsible for resolving it.

I don't see any difference in meaning here, other than sentence 
structure. I think I split things because sometimes someone will assign 
themselves, and then do nothing on the issue for several years ;-)

>   Rejected: Issues that are settled as being somehow invalid or outside 
>             the scope of the system the collector serves.

I think we agree here too...

>   Resolved: Issues that are settled as having been solved.

Indeed. But issues are rejected unless they require chanes to the Zope 
core. My notes are meant to ensure people put in appropriate messages 
when the yresolve issues.

>   Deferred: Issues that are not assigned or settled but warrant revisiting
>             at some later occasion.  This enables, for instance, putting
>             an issue aside until more information is collected.

But this is a trap! All it means is that issues get burried and never 
looked at again, whether they're resolved or not. As I said, I'm 
explicitly changing the meaning of this state rather than adding a new 
one because:

1. This state is useless in terms of what it achieves, as-is ;-)
    Witness all the activity today from me going through the deferred
    issues, most of which had been that way for in excess of a year!

2. Andreas and I need a state which says "this issue is on last warning"
    once we've asked people for more info, so we can easilly come back in
    a months time and find all said issues and reject them unless people
    have provided the required information.

>   Wontfix: Issues that are settled as ones that won't be fixed.  These
>            issues are within the scope of the collector, but would
>            require more effort than they're worth.  (Sustained lack of a 
>            champion who will take responsibility for solving the issue
>            is one sign of that.)

I've tightened this a bit, 'cos I don't want people using wontfix as the 
bin they abused deferred for ;-)

I'd prefer to have long-standing pending issues rather than forgotten 
wontfix'ers...

Lemme know what you think...

Chris

-- 
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
            - http://www.simplistix.co.uk