I think if CommentNotePad is modified as described in my post on "RE:
[BUG] BugFixArchiveViewer and CommentNotePad", approved/closed/update
should be flag checkboxen, maybe made such that they ask the user "This
status should be set only by harvester, or if you're documenting a
harvester published decision. Proceed?". Harvesters and other people
that know what they're doing can hack the question method to answer
true, or something silly like that.

Without a low fence like that, we're might get too many false flags of a
kind that can complicate/slow down the handling of a changeset. So IMO,
either ask, or leave it manual.

Daniel

Brent Vukmer <bvukmer at blackboard.com> wrote:
> > Ok, I'l use [closed] with the update-number from now on. 
> > ("update" and "approved" are reverved for use by the 
> > Harvesters, IMHO. actually, it should be theirs to decide 
> > what's closed and what's not, but with that big baglog I took 
> > the liberty to just doit...)
> > 
> 
> Hmmm.  So would it be a good idea to enhance CommentNotePad to have
> buttons for "Mark as closed", "Mark as approved", "Mark as update"  --
> or should I leave it un-automated and let the harvesters do it manually
> in MailComposition?