[PATCH] D53691: Introduce bug life cycle documentation.

[Kristof Beyls via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

kristof.beyls added inline comments.


================
Comment at: docs/BugLifeCycle.rst:96
+Closing bugs is good! Make sure to properly record the reason for closing.
+
+Examples of reasons for closing are:
----------------
RKSimon wrote:
> Do we need to distinguish between resolving and closing a bug? We have verified/closed states but AFAICT these are barely used.
Good point.
As far as I can see, we don't really attach much difference in meaning to the "RESOLVED", "VERIFIED" and "CLOSED" states.
Therefore, my opinion right now is that we're probably best of to just remove the "RESOLVED" and "VERIFIED" states from our bugzilla instance and only keep the "CLOSED" state, making the workflows simpler.
I do think that this change can be made mostly orthogonally to completing this documentation. If/When we remove the "VERIFIED" and "RESOLVED" states, the documentation becomes less open for interpretation.
What do others think about this?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D53691