Closed Bug 1154031 Opened 6 years ago Closed 6 years ago

Do not automatically set bugs as "new" if filed by canconfirm users

Categories

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: General, enhancement)

Production
enhancement
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

People

(Reporter: mhoye, Unassigned)

References

Details

On the heels of bug 1153108 I'd like to reconsider the idea that CanConfirm-empowered users automatically file bugs as "new". 

Since we're going to expand the scope - hopefully dramatically expand it - and looking at unconfirmed bugs to triage, I don't want that to cause a similar rise in "new" bugs we overlook.
Expand the scope of our triaging process, I mean.
This would be a BMO customization.
Assignee: user-accounts → nobody
Component: User Accounts → General
Product: Bugzilla → bugzilla.mozilla.org
QA Contact: default-qa
Version: unspecified → Production
(In reply to Mike Hoye [:mhoye] from comment #0)
> On the heels of bug 1153108 I'd like to reconsider the idea that
> CanConfirm-empowered users automatically file bugs as "new". 

sorry, but your language isn't clear here.  is this a bug for discussion ("reconsider"), or do you want us to make the change now?
Flags: needinfo?(mhoye)
I'd appreciate if this was NOT a bmo customization but available in upstream Bugzilla or an upstream extension. (Plus I don't understand why a bmo extension would be less work than an upstream extension.)
Defaulting to NEW status is one of the annoyances brought up by several users of Bugzilla installations I maintain(ed).
glob: Sorry, that's a conversational Britishism creeping in. "I'd like to understand the reasoning leading up to the state we're in, and I am going to advocate for this change."

Bluntly: I want to make this change, and I would the timing of this change to be roughly coincident with Bug 1153962 taking effect.
Flags: needinfo?(mhoye)
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #4)
> I'd appreciate if this was NOT a bmo customization but available in upstream
> Bugzilla or an upstream extension. (Plus I don't understand why a bmo
> extension would be less work than an upstream extension.)

from a quick stroll through the code this wouldn't be possible in an extension.

the upstream work to implement this would be more work for us, as it would require parameterisation and backporting, however i can see how this would be desirable for other bugzilla installations.

let's do it on bmo first, then create an upstream patch once the dust has settled here.
Depends on: 1153962
putting this on hold pending the greater bug workflow discussion.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.