[drupal-devel] Should we make project issue status more nuanced?

[Chris Cook]

Nedjo Rogers wrote:
> The basic issue is that too much is put on the single status, "patch".  To
> see the problem in action, we only have to do a search on Drupal project
> issues with status=patch.  I currently get a total of 124 matches, some
> ranging up to 33 weeks old.

I agree. See my comments below.

> What's missing is a way for Drupal contributors - more specifically, the
> subset of developers who are qualified to do so - to pre-filter the
> patches--basically, to put them in a queue for approval, indicating that, in
> their view, the patch meets our approval criteria (set out in the Handbook
> at http://drupal.org/node/10262).

For reference, here is the bug status tree used by Bugzilla.

http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/tip/html/lifecycle.html
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html

Note that Drupal's issue system lacks a resolution field and lumps the 
resolution in with the status value. I think it makes a lot of sense to 
split these apart. Also note the lack of status values for "unconfirmed" 
or "verified" issues.

I don't think the "patch" status makes much sense because anyone can 
attach anything and call it a patch but that doesn't make the issue any 
closer to done. From the perspective of the CVS commiters, using the 
"patch" status to find issues that can be fixed must not work very well 
due to the large number of incomplete patches. From the perspective of a 
developer most issues automatically get the patch status so they'll show 
up on the mailing list and receive attention. This is the wrong reason 
to apply any status.

A resolved status would rectify this by allowing a developer to confirm 
that an attached patch resolves the issue and marking the issue as 
resolved and setting a resolution.

The search system should be able to find/filter issues that have an 
attached "patch" without this status.

Cheers,
Chris