On Feb 24, 7:17 pm, Gabriel Hurley <gab...@gmail.com> wrote: > In regards to #14702 <http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/14702>, which so > far has been a universally favored idea, there's one lingering issue: > > Do we want to implement it as a resolution (i.e. you close a ticket as > "needsinfo" and the reporter reopens to provide the information) or as a > triage stage (like DDN, RFC, etc.)? > > Here's a quick overview arguments for each... > > Resolution: > > - Keeps Trac free from the clutter of old tickets that the author never > returns to clarify. > - Indicates clearly that the ticket in it's current state is unresolvable > and has no forward path. > - Will show up more prominently in the timeline (tickets being > closed/reopened attract attention). > > Triage stage: > > - May intimidate new contributors to see that their ticket was "closed". > - Doesn't discount the fact that there may be a valid issue here which we > don't want to forget about. > > I'll disclose my personal bias that I'm +1 for the resolution and -0 for the > triage stage (I think another stage just adds clutter). > > I'd like to put it to a vote, though, and see what the community (and the > core team) decides. > > *So which shall it be: resolution or triage stage?* > * > * > I'll take care of the docs patch and the Trac admin change once its decided. > > All the best, > > - Gabriel
+1 for a close resolution. As long as the attached comment _politely_ asks the reporter to provide more info and to reopen the ticket if the bug is genuine, then there should be no hard feelings or intimidation. Julien -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
