On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 20:14:30 +0200 Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Casey Duncan wrote at 2004-4-29 22:19 -0400:
I'm happy to report a successful bug day with a final tally of almost 40 issues closed. The specific issues we squashed were:
#28,#181,#321,#340,#349,#439,#444,#495,#511,#532,#540,#543, #544,#545,#546,#553,#562,#574,#584,#602,#637,#644,#654,#658,#666, #678,#724,#800,#810,#811,#875,#1003,#1042,#1050,#1148,#1227,#1298, #1300.
However, you closed (at least one) bug reports without resolving the the issue.
I do not think this is good practice...
Bug reports should remain open until they are either fixed or can no longer occur. They should not be closed just because you do not plan to fix them in the near future...
If a bug will not be fixed, judged by:: - The bug description - The time it has remain open without action - The lack of a patch provided for the bug - The lack of assignment or interest of a sponsor This means it is an unsponsored bug. It should not remain open forever. The bug collector is not a substitute for documentation and issues that will never be resolved should be closed. Otherwise it wastes the time of volunteer bug-fixers. I think the current collector is a bit flawed in the available statuses. There is no specific way to denote an issue as "won't fix" which means that it is possibly a bug, but either it is not fixable, is not deemed worth fixing, cannot be fixed with the information provided, or nobobdy has fixed it for years so it's not gonna happen. I chose to reject the bug hoping that it would cause a reaction, which it did. I'll admit that "reject" is not exactly the right status, however the right status is not currently an option for the collector. Since I can see you feel strongly about this issue, please feel welcome to reopen to bug or change it to a status that better suits it. At this point I see no chance of it being fixed without a champion, however. -Casey