And all the duplicates have closed - duplicates naturally don't have any further progress.
I don't think 60 days is long enough either, but that's a different point. Caroline On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 10:38 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 12:58:25PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > > I agree entirely. What drives *me* batty in turn is when people take a > > confirmed, complete report, ask why it hasn't been fixed yet, and close > > it as invalid because obviously something that's been around for a > > couple of releases can't be relevant any more. Or when people reject > > perfectly valid and complete wishlist bugs (note that it usually takes a > > lot less for a wishlist bug to be complete) because they should be > > specifications (they shouldn't, in most cases) or just because they're > > wishlist. As a developer, I wish I didn't have to spend time checking my > > bug mail just to make sure that well-intentioned but mistaken triagers > > aren't taking items off my to-do list that I want to stay there. > > Something appears to have flagged all inactive bugs as invalid. Apart > from generating a ridiculous quantity of email for no obviously good > reason, a pile of perfectly valid wishlist bugs or issues that require > further work in the rest of the distribution first have suddenly closed. > Who on earth thought that this was a good idea? > > -- > Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- 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
