From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ny6rI-000759-IN for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 17:10:08 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BC38E0B9E; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from petteriraty.eu (host.petteriraty.eu [188.40.80.83]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A993E0B82 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:09:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.197] (qiv5.kyla.fi [82.130.46.197]) by petteriraty.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6BEF2BC12 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4BB7766C.9010702@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 20:10:04 +0300 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090916 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla? References: <4BB70F5E.7010101@gentoo.org> <4BB75DE3.7070308@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4BB75DE3.7070308@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=B8E4ECF0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig2030549B5C267B72734118BA" X-Archives-Salt: 857f293e-0a50-47a7-accb-0e23582d64af X-Archives-Hash: 58e08040eac5f0e3052b1d12eb3a9b5d This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig2030549B5C267B72734118BA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 04/03/2010 06:25 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > On 03-04-2010 09:50, Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: >> I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it jus= t >> means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a >> different resolution should be used. So what do you think about >> disabling later?=20 >=20 > I disagree. Resolved LATER is useful to some maintainers that want to > fix that bug, but don't have time or don't find the issue to be a > priority at the moment. By marking it LATER they're acknowledging the > bug exists and needs to be taken care of. >=20 What is the benefit with this instead of keeping it open until they find time? I doubt for example bug days take LATER resolved bugs into account or user are likely to search for them when trying to find something to work on. >> I would like to avoid things like this: >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113121#c21 >=20 > You've chosen a terrible example as in that case the resolution is > accurate. The forums team didn't find that issue to be a priority and > doesn't have the time to deal with it. As the bug was open for years > without any progress, we chose to close it as LATER. If someone else > wants to step up and take care of it, great. >=20 Yeah there's probably better examples out there but that's what sparked me to think about this so I went with it. From a recruiter perspective the need to tie to LDAP is still there so the issue isn't gone. Regards, Petteri --------------enig2030549B5C267B72734118BA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLt3ZtAAoJEPeUsk245OzwUgMQALE3sECQzWBJh2FJ57YQ5SAH oNG/69ERpq5jyVVwrvbq0e8Vyosz1k4im9h0Xp42C4jROzgg3PwYnixWx16z1dIf KseC+H85atVS6I3vJO0fiOM5qEEANV9NBKdNxlImf9sOHHvGJ4O23yjurbNXFA1F 9bTOxmus/LVKp9BiO6E0niHVfnJT/RGNde6bBJgmCI/qpkm98GJtIsER+Tgj20WV qK5oGHf7zoLuAEh5FzkZYKnMIwNmEPlaKpcksvbMY+m4sJgq1dctYb7Go4eK6Yx1 zw9NKeHsfKqd8KBeukj8LI83OtIrhzqZwj9uHhxAMGp28EQhi/ptowLd7kfXypVD Ggt8IFL1TKc3YDknuhw0yTPrTydgnPF2/MXMNe4ouzIzOlFtI7NaMXmzIrnH6QJU qs2cPloWNucwd+jfrlKPGY3553VhB7I104idzJxFs3BeaFjsadray8kDclX34g7+ 0+kBicVlPT/+sxrpN5uwF7mZSiuQ2mX6aJMcJJ7odpgH53cAZ6r/xgQ9u+5yc1Jb QyOw1EnBybDxu6F8aW8ykujyYxW85+iiIoWKFK/UEFZSiRkVcc/F7FLXi2/fKMT8 +QGnn5xTqN5+zDmEsK/7wSGgT0q9MCezwTyHDfqd1rYQwoOYRBImb+jKWgJo7TmW YA0gv9jVOjnL5HuVaDdu =Vrvq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig2030549B5C267B72734118BA--