Mass closing EOL bugs should not close bugs with pending updates

[Nicola Soranzo]

Il giorno dom, 17/02/2013 alle 17.32 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil ha scritto: 
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Christoph Wickert
> <christoph.wickert at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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:
> >> >> 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.
> >
> 
> Hmm, I always interpreted that the "RELEASE" in CURRENTRELEASE or
> NEXTRELEASE refers to the Release tag of the corresponding package,
> and not to the Fedora release version. The bug header looks like this
> 
> Product:	Fedora
> Component:	lxpanel
> Version(s):	16
> Platform:	x86_64
> 
> In my interpretation, I would _not_ close this bug if I fix it only
> - for another product than "Fedora" , e.g. for "RHEL". RHEL might
> suffer from the same bug as well, but this complaint was for Fedora.
> We cannot ignore Fedora.
> - for another component. It does not make sense to fix a kernel bug
> and close this bug report, does it?
> - for another platform. If the bug is filed for i686 and my fix only
> fixes x86_64, my fix is not related to this bug report. (Of course the
> fix might fix both i686 and x86_64, in which case the bug can be
> closed.)
> - for another Fedora version. I believe the bug is Fedora version
> specific (else why do we have a Version tag?). If a bug is filed for
> version 16, it is for version 16. Other versions might also have the
> same bug, but this is irrelevant from the bug report's perspective.
> 
> Your interpretation treats everything the same but the "Version" part
> differently. Any particular reason?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow#CLOSED

Best,
Nicola