Bug 637 - [Chameleon-AutoDoc]Application should be renamed to "doc_builder"
: [Chameleon-AutoDoc]Application should be renamed to "doc_builder"
Status: CLOSED FIXED
: Chameleon
AutoDoc
: 1.99
: PC Linux
: P2 normal
: ---
Assigned To:
:
:
:
:
:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2004-08-26 13:17 by
Modified: 2004-10-20 11:58 (History)


Attachments


Note

You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Description From 2004-08-26 13:17:31
Application should be renamed to "doc_builder" or something like that.
------- Comment #1 From 2004-10-19 17:27:05 -------
Fixed in cvs
------- Comment #2 From 2004-10-20 08:10:33 -------
Is it good pratice to close a bug like without giving reporter to verify it? 
Just asking.
------- Comment #3 From 2004-10-20 08:16:03 -------
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).

------- Comment #4 From 2004-10-20 08:42:56 -------
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.
------- Comment #5 From 2004-10-20 11:29:07 -------
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. :)
------- Comment #6 From 2004-10-20 11:58:22 -------
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.