On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 04:21:25PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:43, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > > Why would you close a bug report if you were prepared to take it > > > seriously if re-opened? > > > > If you think about that question for a moment then at least one fairly > > obvious answer springs to mind. It's a pretty effective form of > > filtering. > > OK, consider all my KDE bug reports to be filtered then. I have no intention > of re-submitting them (in the Debian BTS or elsewhere). The next person who > encounters them can file a bug report, or they can remain as KDE bugs for > another 5 years (at least one of the bugs has been there since 1998). > > It's most likely that the next person to report these bugs will have less > background knowledge of KDE than I have and produce less usable bug reports. > But I guess you can always filter them too. > > > Besides, you're ignoring the context of the rest of the closing > > message. > > The context was that there was a new minor release of KDE which might possibly > fix some of these serious bugs, and that closing them in bulk was considered > to be the best way to deal with them. > > > None of what you have said justifies claiming that the closing message > > said, or even implied, that such reports would not be taken seriously. > > OK, Chris can demonstrate how serious he is by testing the ones that are > trivial to test (such as 210560) and asking for more information on ones that > are difficult to test. All of the above seems pretty arbitrary. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature