Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:36:17 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: bugbusters@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bugzilla? (was Re: Okay, I think I need some serious introduction ;-) Message-ID: <20030212143617.GA1639@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <3E49BA78.9B24BB22@mindspring.com> References: <20030209185618.GA19962@papagena.rockefeller.edu> <20030209151407.N548@localhost> <2e1y2e7jtu.y2e@localhost.localdomain> <20030211190614.GA2153@gothmog.gr> <3E49BA78.9B24BB22@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2003-02-11 19:07, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > Interesting stuff. I've been toying around with the idea of an > > automated ``close and send a gentle reply to the originator'' script > > for feedback PRs that are more than 3-4 months old and no activity has > > appeared in the audit trail since the last transition to feedback. > > If 3-4 months seems too short, we can change it to 1 year or more. > > What is the intent of timing out bug reports? What is the perceived > need? If it's just to apply a filter so you can not see them, you > can do that by constraining the search filter to ignore PR's older > than some date, without having to remove them from the database. I don't want PRs to automatically close after a while. Having old PRs around is good too. The whole idea of PRs becoming 'suspended' and then closed reminded me of what is now done with feedback timeouts. That's all :) > Old PR's are, to my mind, the most valuable of all PR's, in terms > of attracting talent to the project: persistant breakage is often > the most annoying. Good point. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugbusters" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030212143617.GA1639>