"A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:45:41PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote: >> hard bugs to fix. I guess there are also a lot that we can't >> reproduce and the submitter is MIA. Those might be easier. Ping them >> if not reproducible, if no response in a month, we close. > > The last time there was a thread suggesting closing old bugs, wasn't > the consensus to leave them open for information purposes?
There was an opinion, but certainly not a consensus from me. I think that we should be more agressive in closing bug reports. 1. Open items should represent needed action on the Python documentation or the CPython implementation. Keeping invalid or unactioable items open constitutes noise that interferes with action on valid items. 2. Closed items are just as available for information purposes as open items. Just don't restrict a search a search to open items. 3. Closed items can be reopened either immediately, when the weekly tracker come out, or later, when new information arrives. Consider [ python-Bugs-1437614 ] can't send files via ftp on my MacOS X 10.3.9. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1437614&group_id=5470 Both I and Ronald Oussoren though it almost certainly not a bug, but neither of us closed at the time. The OP never responded to argue otherwise. Does anyone really think this should be left open indefinitely 'for information purposes'? I just closed it. Perhaps next time I review part of the list, I will pick out a few items (say 5) I think should be closed but am less sure of and post here for other opinions. Terry Jan Reedy _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
