Nick Coghlan wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
One issue to consider is also politeness. People sometimes complain that they feel treated unfair if their report is declared "invalid" - they surely believed it was a valid report, at the time they made it.
I agree with Martin for both of these - 'works for me' and 'out of date' convey additional information to the originator of the bug, even if they don't make a signifcant difference from a development point of view.
The term 'works for me' can be confused with 'solution/patch works for me'. I've generally seen the phrase 'works for me' to mean agreement of a proposed action of some sort.
Maybe something along the lines of 'can not reproduce' would be better?
I'd prefer to keep an outright 'invalid' for the cases where the reporter was either genuinely wrong about the intended behaviour, or where the bug report itself is manifestly inadequate (e.g. "I tried to do xyz and it broke" with no further details).