What are the circumstances/situations under which a closed CRF (Change Request Form) is re-opened.
Closed CRF: Changes of a component/module that have been documented, tested, and verified after fixing.
Is that done when a minor change is requested in a major component (previously listed in an old CRF)?
Or is it required to open a new CRF for minor changes as well.
Any comments on how the system works on your side?
If some bug is closed, it has some options to be:
- Decision of someone that this wonīt be fixed
- Itīs fixed
- Will be implemented, etc...
The 1st and 2nd are more probable of re-open, because:
- Someone decided that this bug wouldnīt be fixed, BUT some other MANAGER told that it will be fixed and <end>. hehe
- The second, the defect has appeared again.
Hope I answered
If you have a CRF (major or minor) that has been fully addressed, it should remain closed. If you later find that more additions/alterations are needed, these should be in a new CRF. Otherwise, you end up with one long CRF with only a couple points that anyone is currently concerned with.
If you find a bug in the new functionality, a new issue should be opened. Again, this cuts down on the clutter in the bug tracker.
I agree with Pete - however I will add that where we are, if there is a correlation between a new CRF and a closed CRF then I hold no qualms about making reference to the closed CRF in the new one.
It could be that the old CRF was the root cause of the new CRF and therefore the auditability/traceability would be of use
You're talking about CRF as only requests for new functionalities, or CRF include Bugs.
For pure CRF I'd recommend opening a new one (with link to the old one, as already mentioned), but for bugs I'd reopen it.