Let's finalize a plan on handling old bug/fix/etc. messages in BFAV2 (was Re: Clean up BFAV)

Julian Fitzell julian at beta4.com
Sat Jan 10 18:39:37 UTC 2004

Good to go.

I don't feel strongly either way about mailing all the people in the 
thread, but I'd lean towards not bothering.


ducasse wrote:

> ok for me ken.
> thanks for your time.
> Qualifying the close tag is indeed important this way we will be able to 
> trace closed items if necessary and know why they have been closed.
> Stef
> On 10 janv. 04, at 17:35, Ken Causey wrote:
>> We've discussed this long enough and I think there is at least a general
>> consensus that something should be done about automatically closing
>> older bug/fix/etc. reports.  To at least the general concept I've heard
>> no naysayers and have positive responses from Cees de Groot (who
>> suggested doing so in the first place), Julian Fitzell, Me, Stephane
>> Ducasse, Doug Way, Brent Vukmer, Marcus Denker, and Daniel Vainsencher.
>> I wouldn't mind hearing from more of the Guides since this is a rather
>> drastic action (reversible but it would be a pain to do so).  But so far
>> it seems to be just a matter of working out the details.
>> If we can finalize the details soon I'm willing to take care of this.
>> First I would like to respond to a couple of the comments made:
>> Doug Way, said 'Hm, sending an email to squeak-dev for each one might be
>> overkill...?' and Daniel Vainsencher said 'As another compromise between
>> notifying only the author, and mail-bombing the list, we could mail
>> everyone that had participated in the thread around each particular
>> mail.'
>> I definitely do not want to mail-bomb the list and would not send any of
>> the messages to the squeak-dev list but instead to the squeak-harvest
>> list which no one in their right mind should be subscribed to (at least
>> not in digest mode).  Daniel suggests that everyone who participated in
>> a thread receive the email but that seems a bit extreme to me.  Let's
>> not forget that all of the closed groups will still be fully documented
>> in BFAV2 and nothing will disappear.  All one would need to do is to
>> choose to view closed groups.  At a minimum I think the originator of
>> each thread should be emailed and certainly the squeak-harvest list so
>> the change is incorporated in BFAV2.  Does anyone else agree with Daniel
>> that all thread participants should be emailed?
>> On a related issue I should point out one problem.  BFAV2 (and BFAV)
>> group messages simply by the subject.  There are quite a few examples of
>> completely seperate threads that BFAV2 groups together because they
>> don't have seperate subjects.  This of course means that a few thread
>> originators will not be notified because BFAV2 does not identify them.
>> I don't think this is a major issue myself.
>> OK, so my proposed plan:
>> I will write some code to interface with BFAV2 and identify each thread
>> that has had no discussion since 12/31/2002.
>> For each such thread I will send a message to the thread originator and
>> the squeak-harvest list including a [closed] tag and a [timeout] tag.
>> The text of the message will explain for the thread originator's benefit
>> that the issue is being closed due to age and to help clean up the
>> archives.
>> It will also explain that they should review the issue and resubmit it
>> if it is still relevant.
>> Can I get confirmation from all those interested in harvesting that this
>> plan is acceptable?  Or proposed modifications?
>> Ken Causey
>> P.S. Anyone who would like to discuss the issue in a more realtime
>> manner can find me on #squeak on irc.freenode.net.

julian at beta4.com
Beta4 Productions (http://www.beta4.com)

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list