Hi Peter, I do recommend that tickets need to be checked upon and acted on when:
> A new minor/major version is released. If the ticket is also related to > the newer version include this version into the ticket so people know it's > still an issue for that version as well. > The version related to the ticket reaches end of line, the ticket should > be closed. I'd estimate with the number of open tickets we have, that'd be about the same amount of work as the fellows already put into each version. It'd be nice to do for sure but there just aren't the resources. Also I think the majority of tickets filed against e.g. 1.8 are still valid today. Bug fixes occasionally fix other bugs, but new features rarely supplant other feature requests. Thanks, Adam On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 19:53, Tobias Kunze <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > . > -- Adam -- 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/CAMyDDM17i2ked9nJ4VOYFU8WFNumt1upH4aEvHh4kmZHEqXnMA%40mail.gmail.com.
