When replying to a Needs Info bug, it should be possible to say "I provided the Info"

[Brad Bollenbach]

When replying to a Needs Info bug, it should be possible to say "I provided the Info". Malone should then understand that this is a bug that was Needs Info and got the info.

Currently, often a bug reporter will provide the necessary info, but forget to change the Needs Info flag, because it's not obvious that this should be done.

Another option may be to capture from which user you need info, defaulting to the bug reporter, and then automatically set the bug back to the status it was before needs info (or uncheck the "Needs Info" checkbox; see bug 5786) when that person replies to the bug.

[Christian Reis (kiko)]

Bug 50663 is related.

[Marco Rodrigues (gothicx)]

I like to see implemented another option.. some timeout verification to clean and organize better all packages bugs in Launchpad.

It may set status "Reject" or even "Delete" in some bug report, if it has no "Needs Info" status set or a crash log provided for the period of 3 weeks or 1 month ?

I think it's a good idea.. what do you think ?

[Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)]

Marco, please report that as a separate bug.

[Marco Rodrigues (gothicx)]

Ok.. I'll do it :-) I think it will be good for all translation progress..

[Christian Reis (kiko)]

I would like to see Needs Info/Incomplete handling fixed for 1.1.8.

[Björn Tillenius (bjornt)]

Do we have any evidence that the bug reporter actually does provide the necessary information most of the time? (i.e, that the bug stays Confirmed (or gets moved to Triaged) rather than the triager having to ask more questions). The reason I ask this, is because if it happens often that more information is needed after the bug reporter thinks he provided all the information, this will increase the workload for the QA team.

[Christian Reis (kiko)]

I don't quite understand. Even if the additional information added is not sufficient for the triager to decide what the bug is, we still need a way of tracking bugs that triagers need to at least look at -- otherwise, how will they know what reports to look at? I see this as making it clear what needs to be looked at.

The question /I/ have is what status should we move the bug to, once the answer has been provided.

[LaserJock (laserjock)]

I would think to whatever status it had before it was "Needs Info/Incomplete". Although I'm not sure I like using the status to represent "I've supplied the info", partially because of this problem (what status should it be after) and partially because it might need to stay as "Incomplete" if the reported didn't provide enough info. I was rather seeing this as a tag/flag rather than a status change because it would mean less bug work for triagers and seems to me to more accurately reflect reality as "I've provided the info" isn't a status but rather additional information.

[Björn Tillenius (bjornt)]

On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 02:48:26AM -0000, Christian Reis wrote:
> I don't quite understand. Even if the additional information added is
> not sufficient for the triager to decide what the bug is, we still need
> a way of tracking bugs that triagers need to at least look at --
> otherwise, how will they know what reports to look at? I see this as
> making it clear what needs to be looked at.

Ok, so I don't think that it's clear *why* we should fix this bug. In
what way will it help the triagers? If it's only to provide them with a
way of knowing which bugs to look at, then I think that the fix for bug
50663 already fulfills that use case, and this bug should be rejected.
Bug 50663 will make it possible to hide all Incomplete bugs that haven't
have had a comment added since it was marked as Incomplete. That's a
better approach, since we can't rely on the reporter (or someone else)
actually saying that they provided the info (for example, they don't
know if they provided all the information), so the triager will have to
look at Incomplete bugs anyway.

> The question /I/ have is what status should we move the bug to, once the
> answer has been provided.

My question still is, what's the purpose of this bug; how will it
simplify the triagers' work? IMHO, the only thing that would simplify it
is if we mark the bug as Confirmed, but that might increase the
workload of the QA team (if we get a lot of bugs marked Confirmed
incorrectly).

[Björn Tillenius (bjornt)]

While there might be a small use case that this bug adresses, it's not worth spending time on it now. Bug 50663 will provide a way of looking at bugs that have comments added (which most of the time will be 'information'), and that's good enough for now.

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

[Expired for Launchpad Bugs because there has been no activity for 60 days.]

[Martin Pool (mbp)]

I'd like to see this implemented, because it would make sure that once the information has been gathered, the bug won't expire, as apparently happened to this very bug.

[Martin Pool (mbp)]

Also, I think the way the action buttons work in Answers is pretty nice, and impetus for following this pattern in other areas.