Comment 9 for bug 297614

> > What would "Fix Failed" be used for as distinct from
> > "Confirmed"/"Triaged"? (I know what it would mean, I'm asking what it
> > would be used for.)
>
> It would be used to know a bug's actual status in the workflow - i.e.,
> that a fix has been tried and didn't work. When you consider that at
> any given time there are lots of bugs that are confirmed but don't have
> a fix attempted for them yet, it's useful to have a different state for
> those that have had a fix attempted.

This is something that should be easy to get from looking at the bug activity. Again, to the extent that this isn't easy to do now we should fix that (by displaying the status transition on the main bug page, for example). We could also display it in a unique way, but without requiring the user the record any additional info. The Ubuntu QA team, for example, inspects the time when a bug left a 'Close' status and went back to an 'Open' one. This is done using the API, but if it proves very useful we should display this information in the web interface.

> But I also suggest that a wider view should be taken on this. I know
> Launchpad serves many customers, but the primary ones (at least at this
> stage) are Ubuntu and Canonical (i.e,. our private projects). Perhaps a
> survey of the Ubuntu, Landscape, Online Services, OEM Services, etc team
> would help shed light on what LP users actual requirements are on this
> particular topic? (I.e,. I don't presume to speak for all of them, just
> as I'm sure LP devs don't.)

Couldn't agree more. To be clear - I'm not saying that adding these statuses is not the best solution, just that we should first understand what the optimal workflow is, then design the user interface to facilitate it.