On 05/11/2013 06:01 PM, Shai Berger wrote: > On Sunday 12 May 2013, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11 May 2013 22:58, Shai Berger <s...@platonix.com> wrote: >>> In >>> other communities, I have usually seen "needsinfo" as a ticket state, >>> rather >>> than a reason for closing; such tickets are then closed later, if enough >>> time >>> has passed and no further info is received. >> >> To me that's just giving false hope for people viewing that ticket. If the >> ticket is open, there's a reasonable expectation that there is some action >> you can take to make it progress, but you most likely you can't as only the >> reporter has the needed info. > > I disagree; every person who encounters a problem consistent with the > existing > description, can provide more info. This is, IMO, the only real (rather than > perceived) difference between closing as "needsinfo" and keeping the ticket > in > some sort of open limbo -- if someone else runs into the same problem, I'd > rather they enhance an existing report than start a new one; and nobody looks > at closed tickets.
It seems this is the only argument for not having "needsinfo" as a
closed state, and it rests on a premise ("nobody looks at closed
tickets") that is contradicted by the significant activity we regularly
see on closed tickets. Most people find tickets via Google or links on
e.g. Stack Overflow, and these do not discriminate between closed and
open tickets. I also have not observed a pattern of needsinfo tickets
collecting more dupes than any other type of ticket.
>> Of course, there are people who will take everything personal. Even if it's
>> getting your ticket closed by a stranger on a public bug tracker.
>
> When people have already taken the trouble to file a ticket, if it is closed
> and the closure seems arbitrary and off-handed, they will be offended. I
> would
> be. Then again, I would actually read the comments on the ticket...
In every case where I've seen a ticket closed as needsinfo, it came with
an explicit "please reopen if you can provide more info." This seems
good enough to me; I haven't observed a problem of people responding
poorly to a "needsinfo" closing (the issues are always around "wontfix"
closings). Making the change you are suggesting means introducing a new
tracker-gardening task, "closing old needsinfo tickets." Needsinfo was
added as a "closed" state precisely in order to get rid of the need for
this.
(And FWIW, community triagers like yourself should feel entirely free to
close tickets needsinfo. I think the only reason that isn't clearer in
the contributing guide is that the needsinfo status was added relatively
recently.)
Carl
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
