On 18/09/2007, Henrik Nilsen Omma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >> As one of those who triages various KDE bugs...in the area of KDEBase, > >> in particular, there are around 450 open bugs, we *have* to close > >> invalid bugs. There are around 750, with the INVALID and WONTFIX bugs > >> included. > >> > > > > Please correct me, but I suspect that when you mean "we have to close > > invalid bugs", I think you actually mean "we need to filter out those > > incomplete bugs which we don't have the ressources for investiagting > > further from 'our' 'default' bug listings". (YMMV of course what is > > "your default" bug listing. > > How would that be better from the user's perspective? If everyone who is > working on the receiving end of bugs (triagers and developers) filter > out these bugs they will just be silently ignored forever. I'm not sure > that gives a better impression. > > Instead of 'Ubuntu has 30.000 open bugs' we would have 'Ubuntu has > 60.000 open bugs, many of which are being actively ignored'.
The reality is the same either way. If there is a way of changing terminology and workflow that makes life no harder for QA and developers but make it easier for users to find existing reports of "their" bug (no matter what state they are in) then it should be investigated, F > Henrik > > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- launchpad-users mailing list launchpad-users@lists.canonical.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
