Re: random thought about bug-buddy (in the 'very long term thinking' category)

[Mark McLoughlin <mark skynet ie>]

Hey,

On 8 Jul 2002, Luis Villa wrote:

> On Mon, 2002-07-08 at 19:16, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > Hey Luis,
> >
> > On 8 Jul 2002, Luis Villa wrote:
> >
> > > Also, FWIW, there is no way to make bugzilla have per-version
> > > maintainers, and the infrastructure for that is going to be hellishly,
> > > hellishly ugly. So most likely maintainers are going to continue to at
> > > least get email from huge #s of old, crap installations for some time,
> > > even if they can ignore it in queries. Maintainers, this means you
> > > should be on my side in this discussion ;)
> >
> > 	Why can't bugzilla not block these from being logged in the
> > first place? That would solve the problem now, and in the future.
>
> You didn't read the rest of the thread, did you? :)

	Nah, of course not - don't be silly :-)

	Okay, reading back - the argument was 'We can't get rid of
these bug reports because someone might want them'. Well, we will and
do get rid of old bug reports. The current way (that Luis did a few
months back) was to just close them out and say 'This bug is too old
to be fixed'. I'd like us to also put something in place that if
another bug is logged that falls into the category of 'too old, just
close it', that it shouldn't even reach the database in the first
place.

	So, essentially I do agree with Luis, excepth that we
sholuldn't try and predict the future by putting an expiry date in bug
buddy.

Good Luck,
Mark.

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers