Re: Closing bugs in removed packages, plus .status format change
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 05:03:20PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 01:32:58PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > Heck. Why not make reopen smart like that? And then let unarchive
> > > actually do the more atomic operation of just unarchiving a bug
> > > (for, say, the purpose of adding a tag or a version (in the future
> > > when that's implemented) to a bug and then archiving it back).
> > Because that'd mean that spam would still be accepted for the unarchived
> > bug, even though there's _no_ reason to send mail to it at all (since
> > there's a new bug for it).
> But like I said, for adding something and archiving it back it would be
I'm not convinced about that use case, because that would also require
adding an 'archive' command (unless you wanted to wait 28 days), which
I'm not sure is a good idea.
On the other hand, maybe that wouldn't be so bad, assuming it worked
only on closed bugs. It would give people an easy way to cope themselves
with a bug that gets spammed frequently after it's closed so that it
never expires, and it would make 'unarchive' reversible in case of bug
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]