clean up whiteboard if re-proposing an older bug #40
Labels
No labels
Closed As
Duplicate
Closed As
Fixed
Closed As
Invalid
discussions
easyfix
enhancement
task
ai-review-please
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
pr2jira
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
No milestone
No project
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
quality/blockerbugs#40
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Sometimes people re-propose an older bug - either for a different milestone, or reopen a bug from an older release. When that happens, it seems that BlockerBugs App doesn't correct adjust Whiteboard. An example is here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164492#c26
The bug was accepted in F21, and now proposed for F22 Beta. But
AcceptedBlockerwas not removed from the whiteboard.I think we should clear all of
AcceptedBlockerandRejectedBlockerfrom whiteboard in these cases, provided that the proposal has not been re-raised against an already blocking tracker bug.Yeah, re-proposing basically is not fully supported. This would be an addition to #320.
Marking as a bug not a feature request because the UI offers re-proposing, so it's a feature that's there but broken, not a missing feature :D
Metadata Update from @adamwill:
See https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blockerbugs/issue/225 for another report of this, and some proposals how to handle it.
Metadata Update from @kparal:
Issue tagged with: next
Metadata Update from @kparal: