Marking zapped bugs
zing at fastmail.fm
Fri Nov 5 22:59:01 UTC 2010
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:14:08 +0200, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 16:10:17 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 09:38 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> >> The practical point is that F12
>> >> is about to go EOL which means the bug must be closed...
>> > Why? Obviously it needs to be clear that nothing further should be
>> > expected from the maintainer unless/until the version is bumped. But
>> > the project can choose to indicate that by closing the bugs as
>> > WONTFIX or some other way, e.g., another resolution or by customizing
>> > Bugzilla to show a notice on bugs that are open against an EOL
>> > version of Fedora. Personally, I dislike the use of WONTFIX because
>> > philosophically I think it doesn't fit, and practically it makes
>> > zapped bugs impossible to distinguish from real WONTFIX bugs in
>> > searches (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528319).
>> This is my problem with the auto closing also. Leaving a bug open
>> allows a more dedicated maintainer to come along (even years later) and
>> actually fix or even apply patches that are still relevant without
>> wasting time with bugs that we're actually looked at and legitimately
> Years later pretty much every bug will be irrelevant thanks to the
> underlying changes that happen with every release and asking submitters
> to verify that the bug is still there is the right way to go. After all
> 8 out of 10 abrt submitted bugs against Eclipse stays months with
> questions and needinfo flags and no response from submitters.
> Note that I'm not saying these bugs shouldn't be submitted sometimes
> even just because for the 2 submitters that answer questions but I
> definitely don't want to waste my time closing the rest of them.
> "Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
> lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. "
> This is the best we can do no matter what we want to do!
> P.S. Believe me having open bugs that both the packager and the
> submitter care for are useless and these are the kind of bugs that get
> auto closed. If one of them cares he will change the version flag. Oh
> and looking at a list of hundreds bugs makes things close to impossible
> to put priorities, fix and improve the situation.
I understand what your saying. After some consideration, my issues are:
1. I don't respond to autobots.
2. If the maintainer doesn't care, I don't care. Thus I'm not gonna tick
of some version flag or something.
I think what would help moving forward, (without having to do away with
the autobots, which I welcome) is what Matt said... that the autobots did
not "CLOSE", but had some different status, such as: "AUTO-CLOSED".
More information about the devel