Vetoshkin's idea is a better way to priceed I guess. Giving others some time and then closing the issue.
-----Original Message----- From: "Vetoshkin Nikita" <[email protected]> Sent: 12/24/2013 6:29 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: backlog clean-up Sorry for interfering, just a thought based on my experience. I usually prefer to run over a list of open issues, ask for comments, (optionally) wait for a week or two and then close issue saying "Please, feel free to reopen the issue if it still persists". I does usually work in such environment, when reporters are not interested in your project anymore or the issue has gone and they are a bit lazy to tell you that. But if the issue does exist and is really itching - they usually come back, reopen and clarify there view and answer the questions. On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]>wrote: > There is no concrete procedure afaik. Every now and then one of us goes > over > the list and cleans it up a bit. One key problem is that sometimes the > people who have created the jira or contributed a patch do not responded, > so > the jira remains open because we shouldn´t resolve or close an issue > without > reaching agreement on whether it should be closed. > > Feel free to close issues that you understand as not being a problem, > duplicate, etc. In the worst case, we will open it again. > > -Flavio > > -----Original Message----- > From: German Blanco [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 6:34 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: backlog clean-up > > The project has a large backlogs of JIRAs, but many of them do not reflect > issues in the current versions. > Wouldn't it make sense to spend a little time closing obsolete JIRAs? > E.g. this one: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1392 > Seems to be "Not a problem". > May I just go through the list and start resolving those that are obvious? > Or is there a better procedure to do this? > >
