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

Doug Way dway at mailcan.com
Sun Jan 11 05:45:15 UTC 2004

Sounds good to me.

Just to be clear, I assume you will be closing all of them at once, 
more or less... in other words, they're not being hand-reviewed one by 
one first.

(I suppose if someone has a fix that's over a year old that they feel 
deserves attention, now is the time to add a comment to the 

- Doug

On Saturday, January 10, 2004, at 11:35 AM, 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.
> <signature.asc>

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list