Auto-expiring bugs are getting absurd

[Tom Hughes]

On 05/02/14 22:50, Adam Williamson wrote:

> The problem is that no-one seems to come up with an alternative that's
> any better. Leaving bugs on EOL versions open to rot away and be ignored
> is no use. We *could* give everyone privs to re-open closed bugs, I
> guess, and I personally don't think that would end terribly, but it's
> kind of a radical plan.

What about allowing the reporter to update the version and/or reopen it 
if it does get closed? or is BZ not able to offer that as an option?

TBH I thought the whole point was that the reporter was expected to 
update the version if they wanted it to stay open so I'm a bit surprised 
to hear that they can't unless they are also a packager.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/