Roberto Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) I submit a bug report; > 2) someone looks at it superficially, too superficially, and > posts a comment that tends to deny there is a problem; > 3) I and/or someone else explain that the problem is indeed > there, possibly citing the points of the standards that > are being violated; > 4) the person who said the bug was not (exactly) a bug does > not even care to reply, but the superficial comments > remain there, probably killing the bug report.
While I agree that it can happen to make a too superficial comment on a bug (I surely had done this in the past, and Andrew seems to do this very often), I believe that this does not spoil or kill the bug report itself, once it was agreed that there is indeed a bug. Surely, it does annoy the reporter though, which is a serious problem. > I wonder what is the rationale here. Discouraging bug > reporters may be an effective way to avoid bug reports pile up, > but this is certainly not good for GCC. I totally agree here. I believe Mark already asked us (bugmasters) to be more polite in their work, and I believe that another official statement in this direction would help. > My advice to people filtering bug reports is: if you only had > time to look at the issue superficially, either do not post > any comment or be prepared to continue the discussion on more > serious grounds if the reporter or someone else comes back > by offering more insight and/or precise clauses of the > relevant standards. Agreed. But keep in mind that it is not necessary to reply: once the bug is open and confirmed, the last comment "wins", in a way. If the bugmaster wanted to close it, he would just do it, so an objection in a comment does not make the bug invalid per se. -- Giovanni Bajo
