On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> I think a good middle ground is that we time box how long we let an
> issue without a unit test sit around before it's kicked. If the
> original reporter or another contributor has not provided a unit test
> in a month, we should close it out.
I agree that we should begin aging issues, especially if they don't
even have steps to reproduce. If they don't even have that, then we
should mark the issue as Can't Reproduce and add a comment encouraging
the user to reopen the issue if they can provide steps to reproduce or
even a test. It really boils down to just staying on top of the issues
as they're opened and taking action to close those that are
insufficient.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)u8...@4vyy9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
