The email reports of dependencies are giving the wrong state. In the report below, the first dep is VERIFIED/FIXED and the second should be ASSIGNED. This is a very recent regression (probably today, perhaps yesterday if I've been asleep at the wheel...I get lots of Bugzilla mail). They're shown as [Closed] below. From email@example.com Tue Nov 2 18:49:53 1999 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 15:49:41 -0800 (PST) From: firstname.lastname@example.org To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: [Bug 9075] Changed - script halts silently on document.doctype in XML http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9075 *** shadow/9075 Tue Nov 2 14:32:24 1999 --- shadow/9075.tmp.20601 Tue Nov 2 15:49:41 1999 *************** *** 15,21 **** URL: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/dom/test/one-core-xml/Node Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Summary: script halts silently on document.doctype in XML ! BugsThisDependsOn: 10456[Closed] Script halts silently when it encounters document.doctype in XML. See the above test page. It halts while processing notNullWarn("document.doctype") . --- 15,21 ---- URL: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/dom/test/one-core-xml/Node Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Summary: script halts silently on document.doctype in XML ! BugsThisDependsOn: 10456[Closed], 15118[Closed] Script halts silently when it encounters document.doctype in XML. See the above test page. It halts while processing notNullWarn("document.doctype") . *************** *** 73,75 **** --- 73,80 ---- Vidur's bug list is quite large so I don't want to send this to him without some more analysis. I'll bring this up with him offline and get the DOM perspective on this. + + ------- Additional Comments From email@example.com 11/02/99 15:49 -------+ This is probably happening because we don't construct the doctype DOM node in + the XML content sink. I'm marking this bug dependent on bug 15118, the bug for + creating current unused XML content objects.
Summary: dependency reports wrong → dependency reports misuse the word "closed".
It's a feature. I've changed the format of bug notifications. Tracking the state of dependencies to great detail causes too much mail to be sent. So we just track whether the dependent bugs are considered to be "open" or "closed". Now, the unfortunate thing is that the word "Closed" is already used to mean a particular kind of "non-open" state. If someone could come up with a word that means "either resolved or verified or closed", I'll use that instead.
Another suggestion - use the resolution - fixed, worksforme, duplicate, later, wontfix, etc... that might be more informative, and it can't change without a reopen anyway. However, you should be sure *not* to put the resolution when a bug is reopened. (Shouldn't reopening automatically clear the resolution? firstname.lastname@example.org seems to do that manually every day anyway...).
BTW, there is also a bug in this new system - ASSIGNED bugs are showing up as [Closed]. See the text above.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Ohmigod. Thank you for noticing the very bad ASSIGNED bug. Fixed. And I really really like the suggestion of using the resolution instead of the word "Closed"! Thank you for the great idea. It now works that way.
Things have been working well lately. Marking verified.
Moving to Bugzilla product
Component: Bugzilla → Bugzilla-General
Product: Webtools → Bugzilla
QA Contact: matty
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla old
Version: other → unspecified
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.