On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 6:37 AM, <skip at pobox.com> wrote: > How about replacing all the possibilities with > > patch incomplete > > then elaborate in the issue itself how that is the case. +1 This is much clearer than lumping incomplete patches in with nonexistent ones. A process that goes "needs patch->patch review->(patch incomplete)->commit review->committed/rejected" (with the possibility of multiple iterations between patch review and patch incomplete) would give a pretty clear idea of where any given issue stands. The "unit test needed" stage is actually more a "confirmation needed" stage - i.e. can the reported bug actually be reproduced by anyone other than the original reporter. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4