As can be seen on https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=411285 bugs.kde.org offers the option CLOSED for the Status field. This status's meaning is not documented on https://bugs.kde.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_status This value should be either documented or removed.
The CLOSED status can only be changed by people with elevated privileges in Bugzilla. A bug is only set to CLOSED when a bug reporter repeatedly re-opens a bug marked RESOLVED even after being told not to by the developers. There is no need to document it because people who play by the rules will never need to find out what it means. :)
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #1) > The CLOSED status can only be changed by people with elevated privileges in > Bugzilla. I have no privilege at all in Bugzilla to my knowledge and I can (unless the interface is misleading) set this very ticket to status CLOSED. >A bug is only set to CLOSED when a bug reporter repeatedly > re-opens a bug marked RESOLVED even after being told not to by the > developers. What makes you think so? In any case, the issue applies to all issues, not just bugs.
Nate, how was this issue resolved?
(In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #3) > Nate, how was this issue resolved? https://community.kde.org/Get_Involved/Issue_Reporting#Understand_what_the_resolution_statuses_mean To quote: > RESOLVED does not necessarily mean that the issue has been fixed for you, > just that the Bugzilla ticket itself is no longer considered actionable by > the developers. In other words, we feel no need to document what the CLOSED status means.
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #4) > (In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #3) > > Nate, how was this issue resolved? > > https://community.kde.org/Get_Involved/ > Issue_Reporting#Understand_what_the_resolution_statuses_mean > > To quote: > > > RESOLVED does not necessarily mean that the issue has been fixed for you, > > just that the Bugzilla ticket itself is no longer considered actionable by > > the developers. > > In other words, we feel no need to document what the CLOSED status means. That you feel no need to solve an issue does not mean that the issue is no longer considered actionable by the developers. And in any case, the sentence you quote is not true just because you wrote it on a KDE wiki. That sentence is wrong, as RESOLVED's definition shows. Thanks for fixing it (or just remove it if that is not possible).
Nate, why was this ticket set to INTENTIONAL?
(In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #6) > Nate, why was this ticket set to INTENTIONAL? Because it's intentional that the CLOSED status isn't documented.
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #7) > (In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #6) > > Nate, why was this ticket set to INTENTIONAL? > Because it's intentional that the CLOSED status isn't documented. I assume you mean it was a *known issue* that the CLOSED status would not be initially documented. Being a known issue is not enough to mark a ticket as INTENTIONAL though. For INTENTIONAL to apply, the bug must never be fixed. There are extremely few (if any) tickets which can be marked INTENTIONAL. Basically, unless you master crystal balls, just don't use it. Thanks for fixing this ticket's Resolution.