You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Application should be renamed to "doc_builder" or something like that.
Fixed in cvs
Is it good pratice to close a bug like without giving reporter to verify it? Just asking.
I would say 'bugs should be verified by reporter before being closed' in general but I think that is a little picky in this particular case since it is an absolutely trivial change. I am a strong proponent of having processes to follow but I really believe they have to be practical and not be followed just because they are there. However, Chris could have mentioned what the name was changed to since the request was '"doc_builder" or something like that". In fact, thinking about it, the suggestion to change the name should have been followed by a discussion and consensus in the bug (I think it happened offline).
I agree with you that we do not have to be too picky especially for a simple bug like that. I sent a comment on this bug instinctively. I was wondering if it was done for any bugs.
sorry guys. I will never do that again. I figured that since I was not the one who fixed it, that I could verify. This fix was done a well over a month ago by bill and the bug was not set to fixed. I should of set the bug to verified for windows, but I saw no need to verify it on Linux so I closed it. :)
Chris I think it is correct that you verify it. I only was a little bit surprised that the status of this bug goes from "fixed" to "close" without any verified comment. I saw comment #1 and no verified comment.