Re: On Bugs
On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> One thing this means is that a lot of important bugs that aren't policy
> violations will get downgraded back to normal. This doesn't mean they
> should be ignored, or that there's no need for -qa folk to focus on them,
> or whatever else it seems to mean at the moment. We've got almost 11,000
> open, unique, non-wishlist bugs at the moment. That's a lot. Probably
> unacceptably many .
> So what would be nice is seeing lots of those fixed. Maybe we should have
> some bugsquash months instead of just bugsquash weekends. At the very least
> anyone with some spare time on their hands might like to help with merging
> duplicate reports and sending in patches to existing easily fixed bugs.
> A release goal of 8000 open bugs might be an interesting one to aim for.
Can I close the automatically generated bug reports of Goswin Brederlow
(these "automatic build fails for potato" bugs he sent some weeks
ago)? This will close >200 bug reports. Does anyone disagree with closing
>  http://bugs.debian.org/~ajt/graph.png
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
-- Mahatma Ghandi