Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
> On 16.05.24 23:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right, so what can we do about that? Does Needs Review state need to
>> be subdivided, and if so how?
> Maybe a new state "Unclear". ...
> I think, if we consider the core mission of the commitfest app, we need
> to be more protective of the Needs Review state.
Yeah, makes sense.
> So a third status that encompasses the various other situations like
> maybe forgotten by author, disagreements between author and reviewer,
> process difficulties, needs some senior developer intervention, etc.
> could be helpful.
Hmm, "forgotten by author" seems to generally turn into "this has been
in WOA state a long time". Not sure we have a problem representing
that, only with a process for eventually retiring such entries.
Your other three examples all sound like "needs senior developer
attention", which could be a helpful state that's distinct from "ready
for committer". It's definitely not the same as "Unclear".
regards, tom lane