You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com> on 2005/06/21 19:31:30 UTC
Bugzilla: when is a bug FIXED?
On Tuesday 21 June 2005 10:46, bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
> if we have set of directories with only some of them protected with password
> these protected entries are not shown.
This got marked as a duplicate of PR10575, which is Closed/Fixed because it
got fixed in 2.1/HEAD. But it's *not* fixed in the stable version, 2.0, which
is what the report was about!
We have quite a lot of bugs like that. Perhaps we need a "provisionally
fixed" status in Bugzilla, to denote a bug that's fixed in DEV but not in
the current release version? That way we can legitimately advise people
to include provisionally-fixed bugs in their search before submitting a
new report.
--
Nick Kew
Re: Bugzilla: when is a bug FIXED?
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Tuesday 21 June 2005 18:38, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 12:31 PM 6/21/2005, Nick Kew wrote:
> >On Tuesday 21 June 2005 10:46, bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
> >> if we have set of directories with only some of them protected with
> >> password these protected entries are not shown.
> >
> >This got marked as a duplicate of PR10575, which is Closed/Fixed because
> > it got fixed in 2.1/HEAD. But it's *not* fixed in the stable version,
> > 2.0, which is what the report was about!
>
> There is a FixedInTrunk keyword now, which should probably apply
> to any bug not backported to 2.0.
That would imply that such bugs MUST remain OPEN, so that searches for
bugs applicable to released versions will find them. The bug in question -
among others - was marked FIXED.
--
Nick Kew
Re: Bugzilla: when is a bug FIXED?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 12:31 PM 6/21/2005, Nick Kew wrote:
>On Tuesday 21 June 2005 10:46, bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
>
>> if we have set of directories with only some of them protected with password
>> these protected entries are not shown.
>
>This got marked as a duplicate of PR10575, which is Closed/Fixed because it
>got fixed in 2.1/HEAD. But it's *not* fixed in the stable version, 2.0, which is what the report was about!
There is a FixedInTrunk keyword now, which should probably apply
to any bug not backported to 2.0.
Bill