On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 01:48:15PM -0400, A. Costa wrote: > On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:13:54 +0900 > Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes, time-keyd events in the BTS would be awsome. > > But what if the reporter died? Would a bug cease to exist just > because its reporter did? "If a tree falls in the forest..." > > I've submitted valid bugs that took several months for their > maintainers to even look at, sometimes years. Or sometimes the bug > sits there for a while, then the maintainer quits, and a new > maintainer comes on and fixes it.
Obviously there is room for abuse. But I still think it is of value if you are managing a lot of bugs, as the kernel-team is. For instance, a bug which required more information to resolve, and no information is forthcoming, might be best of marked as +wontfix (i.e. cantfix), and having this happen automatically after a period of activity makes sense to me. Alternateively, more volenteers could sift through bugs reports, and manually update them. > Note to Maximilian Attems: where should this be discussed? I figure > if somebody emails me a "me too" about an off-topic idea that seems > dubious, it's fair to reply. By which reasoning the first poster > would be at fault for posting off-topic, not me. OTOH, one might > argue that nobody should post such messages, regardless of the cause, > and each additional reply just compounds the irrelevence. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
