patch management?

[Jim Blandy]

> Jim> Here's a set of states which I think could do the job.  Do you
> Jim> think these would work?
> 
> Jim> State: unclaimed
> Jim> State: assigned
> 
> For the Java Gnats database we have a "java-hacker" "person" which is
> really the unassigned state.  Does it make sense to go this way
> instead?  I don't know.

I thought about that, too, but the "unclaimed" state is exclusive of
all the others, so to put that information in a different field seems
too loose.  What does it mean for a patch to be "State: accepted", but
"Responsible: java-hacker"?  Databases always get dirty.  You would
have to screen for all these cases in your queries.

Part of the confusion, I think, is because "assigned" is kind of a
non-name.  It mostly indicates what *hasn't* happened to the patch: no
decision has been made, and no questions have been reached.  The patch
is still assigned to someone when it's in "feedback".  So the name
doesn't really mean what it suggests.  "Assigned" really means, "Well,
at least it's not unclaimed!"

Maybe "pondering" would be a better name for the state.  I like that
better.  It hints that a decision is expected, and it lets you tell
people, "Go away --- I'm pondering patches."  :)