Re: [Gimp-developer] About closing feature requests as invalid

[scl <scl gplus gmail com>]

Hi,

1)
I think there is some vagueness about the meaning of the
fields in Bugzilla (yes, sometimes it also affects me).
They are defined here:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html

We already have a severity 'Enhancement' for feature requests
and also use the milestone 'Future' for things that are
currently not meant to be included in one of the next
releases.

Indeed, the definition of 'Invalid' lacks of clarity:
'This bug is in some way not valid...'.
But if we close bugs we will neither fix nor accept patches
we clearly use the state='CLOSED-WONTFIX'.
Why would we use 'CLOSED-INVALID' for this?

2)
Let's also not forget, that the mailing lists have around
1000 subscribers and are mirrored directly to various
sites (GMane, Markmail, etc.).
After committing a comment to a bug in Bugzilla we all can
see the recipients: a handful of interested people.
If I do a Google search on 'tito' and constrain the search
to bugzilla.gnome.org, gmane.org or markmail.org I get
1 (in words: one) result for bugzilla.gnome.org and lots
for the other sites.
This confirms that the mailing lists are suited better
for broad discussions than Bugzilla.

2)
When I closed the bug 'INVALID' I obeyed the projects policy,
see for instance http://www.gimp.org/bugs/ in the 2nd paragraph.
However, as we see there are doubts and disagreements about its
practical use.
I think it is a good idea if the people who usually care most
about policies joined in:
Mitch, Peter, Schumaml - what are your opinions?

Greetings and Happy Easter!

Sven