I took a stab at this:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#VERIFIED

I made some assumptions in writing this that should be confirmed. The biggest assumption is that this is a state that is manually set by triagers (rather than automatically set by Bodhi). AFAIK, this is accurate, but I could not find anything definitive.

I'll be willing to update the flowchart on this page as well. I believe this state would fit between ON_QA and CLOSE, but I am not entirely sure.

Thanks for taking this task dafrito!

Replying to [comment:1 dafrito]:

I made some assumptions in writing this that should be confirmed. The biggest assumption is that this is a state that is manually set by triagers (rather than automatically set by Bodhi). AFAIK, this is accurate, but I could not find anything definitive.

You are correct. The VERIFIED bug state is something testers or triagers would set after ...

1. Manually confirming that the reported problem is fixed in the updated package(s) noted in the bodhi request
2. Or, but inspecting comments in the bug from others who have noted the reported problem no longer occurs when using the updated packages provided in the bodhi request

I'll be willing to update the flowchart on this page as well. I believe this state would fit between ON_QA and CLOSE, but I am not entirely sure.

You got it. Thanks again!

Heads up, I've added this topic for discussion at the next BugZappers meeting (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers:meeting-agenda-list).

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#VERIFIED

I changed the description of VERIFIED to (hopefully) make it more readable. I also clarified a couple things:

• VERIFIED requires a packaged fix; things like workarounds or manually-applied patches are not sufficient
• User comments provide sufficient confirmation to use VERIFIED

I also updated the flowchart to include this state.

Please let me know, or correct it directly, if any of this needs revision. :)

Nicely done Aaron, thanks for the contribution. I like the clarification on requiring a ''packaged fix'' and not workarounds.

For those watching at home, minutes from the BugZappers meeting where dafrito, tk009 and adamw discussed this change are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-06-29/bugzappers.2010-06-29-15.03.html

I'm going to close this out, please feel free to re-open should additional questions/comments on this topic surface. Thanks again!