Subject: re: PRs should first have submitted status rather than open
To: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Petri Koistinen <email@example.com>
Date: 05/25/2001 17:02:21
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2001, Petri Koistinen wrote:
> : Well, but the submitter of PR doesn't get any confirmation that somebody
> : has realy readed her/his PR and started to work on it.
> This is what the "analyzed" PR state is intended to cover.
Yes, but it apparently doesn't work, there is 1923 open PRs against 136
analyzed PRs (25 May 2001 12:46:43 GMT). Submitted status would act like
a filter before open status.
Well, we don't need to declare that submitted as one of the official
status, like those described in http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/pr-states.html
We would only need one more report on http://www.netbsd.org/Gnats/ page.
Report of PRs with empty Audit-Trail: and "State: open" field. So this is
the (new) definition of submitted PR.
Yes, I know that who ever can send email to PR which will appear in
Audit-Trail: field, but then somebody has done something for PR and it can
declared as open (well officially it is already). This kind of query
shouldn't be that hard to write?