Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Status label for issues

[Roland Knall <rknall@xxxxxxxxx>]

It wasn't clear to me, that your list was the original list + new entries. 

I have especially an issue with the new ws-status labels and their transitions. Judging from a company, where we have about 50 developers whose daily bread it is to transition properly in Jira, I cannot see an open-source project with no additional tooling to properly transition between e.g. unconfirmed => confirmed => in-progress.

That is my main concern. 

Am Di., 27. Apr. 2021 um 08:44 Uhr schrieb Uli Heilmeier <zeugs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Diff between current and proposal list:

- incident
- question
- cli::tshark
+ ui::tshark
- ui::gtk
- version::0.x
- version::1.0
- version::1.10
- version::1.12
- version::1.2
- version::1.4
- version::1.6
- version::1.8
- version::2.0
- version::2.2
- version::2.4
- version::2.6
- version::3.0
+ version::outdated
+ ws-status::unconfirmed
+ ws-status::confirmed
+ ws-status::waiting-for-response
+ ws-status::in-progress
+ ws-status::invalid
+ ws-status::wontfix
+ ws-status::fixed
+ ws-status::duplicate

I have no strong feelings about the os::* labels. We can reduce them to os::mac, os::windows, os::linux, os::unix.


Am 26.04.21 um 23:13 schrieb Roland Knall:
> The list seems to be duplicated with the lists from above. Anyhow, it seems we just have too many labels already, and I
> am still not convinced that they can be used properly and consistently at this point
>
> I would clean up the proposal list first, then from there figure out which items we need on the list
>
> cheers
> Roladn
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe