On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:27:49 +0100, "Fergal Daly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On 12/09/2007, Onno Benschop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2. While Dapper isn't the bleeding edge of Ubuntu, code that exists > > in Dapper exists in Feisty and Gutsy today. That implies that bugs > > that exist in Dapper are also likely to exist. Disk space is > > cheap. A computer is great at searching stuff. Leave the bug in > > the system, leave it open so others can stumble upon it and not > > feel that they are the first to experience this problem. Debugging > > is as much about writing code as it is about the "ah-ha" moment in > > which someone determines the cause of the problem. > > What is the rationale behind skipping closed bugs in a search? I've > been burned by this in the past. > > I can understand why the QA guys or the even developers would want > this but for a user, who is actually making the effort to not only > report a bug but to search for dups first, why would they want to > ignore closed bugs? Closed bugs often contain exactly what that user > needs - a workaround or a timeline for the fix to be released, > > F >
Yes, yes, yes. As a sometimes-bug-filing-user, I would just like to just underline the above. Thanks Fergal. Best Regards Hugo Heden -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
