On 04/03/2010 06:25 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > On 03-04-2010 09:50, Petteri Räty wrote: >> I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it just >> means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a >> different resolution should be used. So what do you think about >> disabling later? > > I disagree. Resolved LATER is useful to some maintainers that want to > fix that bug, but don't have time or don't find the issue to be a > priority at the moment. By marking it LATER they're acknowledging the > bug exists and needs to be taken care of. >
What is the benefit with this instead of keeping it open until they find time? I doubt for example bug days take LATER resolved bugs into account or user are likely to search for them when trying to find something to work on. >> I would like to avoid things like this: >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113121#c21 > > You've chosen a terrible example as in that case the resolution is > accurate. The forums team didn't find that issue to be a priority and > doesn't have the time to deal with it. As the bug was open for years > without any progress, we chose to close it as LATER. If someone else > wants to step up and take care of it, great. > Yeah there's probably better examples out there but that's what sparked me to think about this so I went with it. From a recruiter perspective the need to tie to LDAP is still there so the issue isn't gone. Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
