Mass closing EOL bugs should not close bugs with pending updates

[Christoph Wickert]

Am Sonntag, den 17.02.2013, 16:12 -0500 schrieb Orcan Ogetbil:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 17.02.2013, 14:46 +0100 schrieb Tadej Janež:
> >> On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 12:02 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I found that a couple of F16 bugs were closed by endoflife at fp.o even
> >> > though there were pending updates for F17 and F18 to fix them. As a
> >> > result, the bugs are now closed WONTFIX even they were or are going to
> >> > be fixed.
> >>
> >> What you describe is another example of strange behavior of the Fedora
> >> EOL Closure script.
> >> I discovered two related problems that I described three days ago:
> >> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-February/178649.html
> >>
> >> Since then I found a page that describes the Fedora 16 EOL Closure
> >> procedure:
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora18#Fedora_16_EOL_Closure
> >>
> >> It says that the bugs with "version == Fedora 16" and "status != CLOSED"
> >> are subject to automatic closure. Could you give an example of a bug
> >> that you described?
> >
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2359/lxpanel-0.5.12-1.fc18
> > and
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2359/lxpanel-0.5.12-1.fc17
> > fix several bugs, among them two very old and annoying ones:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782431 and
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785906
> >
> > As you can see the bugs were already ON_QA before they were closed
> > WONTFIX.
> >
> 
> But those are bugs filed against Fedora 16. Will Fedora 16 receive the
> fix at this point? No. Hence WONTFIX is correct.

No it's not. The bug is resolved in a later release of Fedora, thus
CURRENTRELEASE or NEXTRELEASE are correct. WONTFIX implies it was not
fixed it all.

> Either the person who filed the bug, or the assignee could have bumped
> the bug's Fedora version in the given timeframe, but they did not. I
> think the 28 day period was sufficient amount of time to react.

I agree, but I don't think we can rely on the bug reporters, nor on the
maintainers. Therefor I suggest to not mass close bugs which are already
ON_QA, in fact, that's what the bugzappers documentation says, too.

Best regards,
Christoph