[squeak-dev] Re: Mantis status meanings
hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
Tue Sep 7 15:58:54 UTC 2010
On 9/7/10, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> On 07.09.2010, at 17:03, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>> On 9/7/10, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> On 9/6/2010 8:32 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:
>>>> Ken Causey wrote:
>>> The reality is that Mantis is completely overloaded with old crap. And
>>> we lack the man power to keep it current (if you're willing to help
>>> you're more than welcome). I think that what we should probably do is to
>>> just close all bugs older than two years to get a handle on it.
>> I support this proposal. We could just mark them as 'Expired' with a
>> note saying something like.
>> "This bug has not had any attention for more than two years so it is
>> considered to be 'Expired' and was closed. It might be that the issue
>> has been addressed in the latest Squeak 4.1 trunk image, it might as
>> well be that the issue is still open or it could be that it does not
>> apply anymore. If you are interested in this bug please do further
>> investigations and consider reopening it again".
>>> perhaps close 'em all and start over. The real problem with bug trackers
>>> is that if they're not kept current all the time they tend to simply
> IMHO just closing old bugs is not going to improve anything. What do we gain
> from doing that?
> Closing a bug just because nobody can be bothered to look right now is bad
> style, IMHO. Somebody took the time to report it. We should honor that.
> I do support cleaning up the tracker, and closing tickets that are not
> relevant anymore. But age of the ticket is no indication of relevance.
> - Bert -
I wanted to check out what kind of issues we are talking about, so I went to
I have chosen 'Resolution' = open
sort by 'Last Update - ascending'
I get over 1000 issued, the the ones which are resolved are there as
well, so I did not succeed.
Could somebody who knows more about Mantis provide a filter please?
More information about the Squeak-dev