On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 13:07 +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:
> 
> Basically the aim I have for this is too draw the attention of you
> dev's to bugs that are a 'quick' fix. 
> 
> Therefore meeting the aim of closing bugs without you guys having to
> do most of the investigation...

Sounds good to me :)

> I have also though of going thru bugs.gentoo.org and reassigning the
> priority of bugs into categories

I don't think anyone would really object to that, other than maybe some
bug spam.

> I also believe that there should be some bugs marked as WONTFIX,
> CANTFIX.

Yes, those are great. Would be nice if there was a YOUFIX :)

> For example jboss https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148383 and
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66965
> 
> I believe, and it will be interesting in hereing your views on this,
> that bugs should only be open if they are actually going to be worked
> on.

Well since they are stuff that's in tree, in theory they should remain
open. Till there is an alternative in tree, or fix. Otherwise closing
might just cause someone else to file a new bug instead of finding the
pre-existing closed one.

>   With jboss we now have a binary ebuild in the overlay that could
> replace the existing versions and these jboss bugs could be closed. 

Adding binary to tree, ew. Bugs closed, good.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java