A couple of changes to note

[Mackenzie Morgan]

On Wednesday 04 March 2009 5:26:35 am Wolfger wrote: 
> Speaking as somebody who does a lot of invalidating of old bugs, I
> have to say that responses from the submitter are the exception, not
> the rule. Maybe (and I'm being generous) 10% of these bugs see life
> again. So this (proposed?) change only adds to the work load without
> providing any extra value. Under the 4-weeks-to-dead system, a triager
> only touches the bug once, and if the bug is still alive, the
> submitter touches the bug once. Under this new system, triagers will
> have to touch the bug twice if they are dead (don't play with dead
> bugs!), but the process for it's-not-dead-yet bugs hasn't actually
> changed at all.

Leaving a bug which has not had a response alone, in incomplete-without-
response mode does not hurt anything.  They don't *need* to be closed. 
Prompting the user to supply more of the needed input can be good.  Going 
through the list of bugs last touched 28 days ago and killing them makes 
reporters feel ignored. The bugs aren't dead til you invalidate them.  Someone 
that can reproduce it can supply the needed input.  Once you invalidate, it 
goes off everyone's radar and stops showing up in bug searches, so people who 
can reproduce have to go through submitting a whole new bug when they could've 
just added the one missing piece of information to the original. 

Triaging's not about closing as many bugs as possible.  It's about improving 
bug reports.  You could say "resolving" bugs, but "nevermind we don't want to 
deal with you because you're not prompt enough" isn't really a resolution.

-- 
Mackenzie Morgan
http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com
apt-get moo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20090304/56d015e6/attachment.sig>