Hi David, first off: thank you for voicing your opinion and starting this discussion. Project governance decisions like this are often implicit or dictated by tradition, so it's worth revisiting them occasionally!
On 19-09-26 16:42:25, David Vaz wrote: >So if we would decide to close stalled tickets after some inactivity period >we could massively reduce the opened tickets list. I'm strongly opposed to this move. In all Open Source projects I have ever seen with this pattern, it was a frustrating experience for all involved: As a user I'd report a bug, the developers would confirm it, and if they didn't get round to fixing it, I'd receive a notification that the issue was about to be closed unless I took action. So, every two months or so, I'd drop a "the issue still persists" comment (annoying, really!) – or I'd be so frustrated that I'd just not respond and see the issue closed. As a user who found a bug, I'd have to go through a LOT of closed-but-valid tickets to see if mine was a duplicate – these systems tend to have a lot more duplicates, naturally, since many people don't go through this touble. And as a developer, you get a notification every time somebody comments "issue still persists" (often in increasingly clipped or frustrated messages), which is not exactly what you want to wake up to either. >Let us focus the efforts on the really active ones. Or: Let us focus the efforts on the really valid ones. And if all the open ones are valid, I see no advantage to closing them. Best regards, Tobias -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20190927185338.efeop5ukeuvxpqxn%40cordelia.localdomain.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
