On 2016-09-20 at 19:00, Santiago Vila wrote: > [ Please don't Cc:me ] > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:29:14PM +0200, Abou Al Montacir wrote: > >> Can you please explain to me how do you understand the following >> statements in the DSC? > > Of course I can. > >> 3. We will not hide problems [...] > > This means the BTS is visible to everybody, even anonymously. In > other words, the BTS is not facebook, it's the old good open web. > > It does not mean anybody has the right to decide on what bug I will > be working tomorrow, because we are an organization made by > volunteers. I think the logic here is something like: A closed bug is presumptively a fixed bug (because bugs which have been fixed get closed). An open bug is presumptively a non-fixed bug. Therefore, to close a bug which has not been fixed is to pretend that the problem reported in that bug has been fixed, i.e., does not currently exist. Therefore, to close a bug which has not been fixed is to attempt to hide the problem reported in that bug, by making it appear as though that bug has been fixed. Russ has provided a rationale for why leaving insufficient-data bugs open is not a good idea for many kinds of projects, and I believe for why Debian would be one of them; I'm not sure I necessarily accept that rationale, but it is a solid one. That doesn't invalidate the above logic, however, only explain why it may not be able to prevail in the circumstances which we have to live under. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature