That need to close bugs?
caroline.ford.work at googlemail.com
Sat Sep 22 14:29:37 UTC 2007
And all the duplicates have closed - duplicates naturally don't have any
I don't think 60 days is long enough either, but that's a different
On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 10:38 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 12:58:25PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I agree entirely. What drives *me* batty in turn is when people take a
> > confirmed, complete report, ask why it hasn't been fixed yet, and close
> > it as invalid because obviously something that's been around for a
> > couple of releases can't be relevant any more. Or when people reject
> > perfectly valid and complete wishlist bugs (note that it usually takes a
> > lot less for a wishlist bug to be complete) because they should be
> > specifications (they shouldn't, in most cases) or just because they're
> > wishlist. As a developer, I wish I didn't have to spend time checking my
> > bug mail just to make sure that well-intentioned but mistaken triagers
> > aren't taking items off my to-do list that I want to stay there.
> Something appears to have flagged all inactive bugs as invalid. Apart
> from generating a ridiculous quantity of email for no obviously good
> reason, a pile of perfectly valid wishlist bugs or issues that require
> further work in the rest of the distribution first have suddenly closed.
> Who on earth thought that this was a good idea?
> Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss