On Thu, 8 Oct 2026 at 22:37, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development < [email protected]> wrote:
> Il 08/10/26 12:02, Jouni Äijälä ha scritto: > > I agree, old bugs should not be closed just because they are old. At the > > same time we should avoid this kind of situation that we have thousands > > of over 10 years open bugs which most likely never be fixed. > > Why not? What's the harm at keeping them open? > I think this is the fundamental question that hasn't been answered. > Indeed. Anyone who doesn't want to see old bugs can easily set Jira to filter them out by creation date, length of inactivity or Version Found. That's better than unilaterally hiding them from everyone. IMO, closing unfixed bugs only serves to provide a distorted, even dishonest, picture of product quality and the true level of technical debt. In 35 years, I have never seen a project cure technical debt by hiding it. > Reason why > > we are not using "need more info" yet is that by doing this we would > > kind of ask people to retest every bug and this is not what we want. > > *The Qt project* ought to retest them. The reporter has already done > their job. > Agreed. I suspect that a significant percentage of those bugs could be automatically retested using AI and/or that AI could be used to fill in missing info (such as minimal test cases) that could improve the chance of a developer choosing to work on them. Perhaps such an exercise would make for a good intern project. Cheers, -- Jason
-- Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
