Am 10.01.19 um 19:40 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> Conclusion : the affected status is only temporary and enough to go
> once the backport is done. This simply means we don't need a "fixed-1.9"
> or whatever, we just have to remove the "affected" label exactly as it
> would have been if the issue had been reported the day after.
> So in the end we can live with simply "affects-1.8" etc and remove these
> flags once the fix(es) is/are backported.

Makes sense.

> We could decide that bugs for which no "affects-X.Y" label exist anymore
> can be closed. That doesn't mean the issue doesn't affect older branch,
> it means it's not known to affect them yet, which is similar to before
> the bug report (since an issue tracker only tracks known defects and not
> hypothetical ones).

Ideally the backports would happen more timely to keep the list of
"Open" issues clean. Otherwise some of the "Open" issues are completely
unfixed, while for others "merely" the backport is missing.

> With this model, there is less work for everyone involved, all the info
> is concentrated together, users can see that their version remains bogus
> because we don't know how to backport the fix but the next one is fixed
> so it might be time to upgrade, and there's much less info duplication
> leading to the inevitable consistency that comes from it.

I guess that will work then.

Best regards
Tim Düsterhus

Reply via email to