data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0e44e/0e44e71002b121953844f91d449442aafa9cfd14" alt=""
There should be some greater care exercised in closing old bugs. Marking them "deprecated" and then erasing them is only a good strategy if we have no means of reproducing the error or ascertaining what the OP was talking about. For instance, in www.python.org/sf/640553 , it was possible for a reviewer to directly verify whether usr/local local was still being used in setup.py. Likewise, www.python.org/sf/728515 should not have been closed (Martin's post could have been taken as a clue that the bug was valid and simply waiting for some volunteer to submit a patch). Old age and a missing OP is not sufficient reason to close a bug. If the report is clear and the bug is potentially still valid, it should be left open. Efforts to clear old bugs should focus on fixing them or making a conscious Won't Fix decision (with old age possibly indicating that there is not a real problem in practice). Raymond P.S. When setting a time deadline for an OP to respond, we should use some terminology other than "deprecated". The word doesn't fit well and can be confused with the unrelated topic of module or feature deprecation.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c5e0/4c5e094efaa72edc3f091be11b2a2b05a33dd2b6" alt=""
"Raymond Hettinger" <raymond.hettinger@verizon.net> writes:
There should be some greater care exercised in closing old bugs.
Possibly. OTOH, we have something like 900 open bugs to work on, and it's not like bug reporters can't re-open a bug report if they think it's been closed in error (this has happened a few times already, and it's a good thing, IMHO).
Well, that one in particular was always in the "is it really a bug?" category.
But if closing a bug is an effective way of kicking things into life again... Cheers, mwh -- ARTHUR: Don't ask me how it works or I'll start to whimper. -- The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Episode 11
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/54541/54541caab4b2a8f6727e67c67f8da567e9464f84" alt=""
On 6/1/05, Michael Hudson <mwh@python.net> wrote:
I'm seeing this effect in a lot of bugs I closed as old ones. I think that using the mail-OP-and-commenters property of the SF bug tracking is a good thing here, and that that mail is enough alert to the interested people for them to reopen the bug if not closed correctly. Take note that for closing it, first there's a warning, and if in a *month* (which really happens to delay into several months, my fault) the interested people don't take care again of that bug... However, I'm not opposing myself to a change in our behaviour about this old bugs. Let's just define a new procedure (if we want to) and then I'll follow it. Thanks. . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c5e0/4c5e094efaa72edc3f091be11b2a2b05a33dd2b6" alt=""
"Raymond Hettinger" <raymond.hettinger@verizon.net> writes:
There should be some greater care exercised in closing old bugs.
Possibly. OTOH, we have something like 900 open bugs to work on, and it's not like bug reporters can't re-open a bug report if they think it's been closed in error (this has happened a few times already, and it's a good thing, IMHO).
Well, that one in particular was always in the "is it really a bug?" category.
But if closing a bug is an effective way of kicking things into life again... Cheers, mwh -- ARTHUR: Don't ask me how it works or I'll start to whimper. -- The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Episode 11
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/54541/54541caab4b2a8f6727e67c67f8da567e9464f84" alt=""
On 6/1/05, Michael Hudson <mwh@python.net> wrote:
I'm seeing this effect in a lot of bugs I closed as old ones. I think that using the mail-OP-and-commenters property of the SF bug tracking is a good thing here, and that that mail is enough alert to the interested people for them to reopen the bug if not closed correctly. Take note that for closing it, first there's a warning, and if in a *month* (which really happens to delay into several months, my fault) the interested people don't take care again of that bug... However, I'm not opposing myself to a change in our behaviour about this old bugs. Let's just define a new procedure (if we want to) and then I'll follow it. Thanks. . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
participants (3)
-
Facundo Batista
-
Michael Hudson
-
Raymond Hettinger