Re: What bug reports are for
"Jesús M. Navarro" <email@example.com> writes:
> I think I'll go here into troubled waters but It's my opinion (as
> somebody that has worked implementing and policying issue tracking
> systems, so I think it's an informed opinion, but just an opinion
> nevertheless) that there's no thing such too long a bug list.
I completely disagree. And that's also an informed opinion. :)
> What it usually happens (at least in my experience) is that too long a
> bug list hurts the ego of the one that think of himself as being
> responsible for that so we, being humans the way we are, feel a strong
> inclination to "resolve" it by whatever means we find and being an easy
> scape path sweeping them under the carpet, that's what we'll do.
You've basically said here that everyone who disagrees with you on what
methods are practically effective in bug management is just suffering from
a bruised ego. This comes across as condescending rather than as a
foundation for a useful discussion.
I pointed out in my previous message some of the practical problems with
leaving all the type 3 bugs active in the BTS, and in previous threads on
this topic others have pointed similar issues in considerably more depth.
If you want to convince people not to close type 3 bugs on packages where
there's no resources to deal with them, you're going to have to engage
with those arguments and understand the problems that they're trying to
solve by closing those bugs (and recognize that they *are* solving
problems, not just assuaging their egos).
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>