> Yet open tickets do in some ways suggest they may happen sometime which isn't 
> the case.

Agree 100%.

I'm pretty happy closing tickets with a status that indicates just what you are 
saying; "This is so old that we can no longer effectively work it. If you 
disagree, please open a new up-to-date ticket. " Maybe we can have a closed 
ticket status like "OBSOLETE" or something like that?

Adam

> On Apr 13, 2018, at 11:58 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> The number of unresolved tickets has climbed a bit recently so I cheated and 
> went and cleaned up some old ones to keep the count down.  The batch today 
> were over 4 years old (arbitrary choice) and look to be done, superseded or 
> in some way no longer relevant.
> 
> I thought they were all clear-cut but do reopen them if you see ticket 
> differently.
> 
> Generally, what to do about old tickets?
> 
> Some are still relevant, some are addressed elsewhere, some have drifted to 
> the point of being difficult to understand.  Where an old ticket that isn't 
> getting any interest (there are at least 5 SDB tickets), I don't see that 
> having it open serves much purpose; it isn't a promise to do anything about 
> it. If new information comes along, it is likely in a new ticket. Yet open 
> tickets do in some ways suggest they may happen sometime which isn't the case.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
>    Andy
> 

Reply via email to