On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 04:08:56PM +0100, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Christian Robottom Reis wrote on 06/06/08 22:30: > > > > On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 02:28:30PM -0700, Brian Murray wrote: > >... > >> Should bugs with duplicates be eligible for expiration? > > > > I guess the /with/ there was a bit understated. I am not sure of the > > answer, though. In a way you want them to, because it could be a bug > > that affected a variety of users but no longer does; on the other hand, > > we can't really detect whether activity in the duplicates occurred. > > Maybe it's safer to exclude them. > >... > > If a bug report should expire, it's because it lacks the necessary > information for developers to work on it, and enough time has passed > that nobody is likely to provide that information. > > That a report has duplicates does not alter whether it has the necessary > information for developers to work on it. So I don't see why that should > make the report immune from expiry. > > However, marking a duplicate of an Incomplete report gives a big bump to > the probability that someone (especially someone involved with the > duplicate report) will soon provide the necessary information in the > original report. > > Therefore, I think marking a duplicate of an Incomplete bug report > should reset the timer back to 60 days. That makes the most sense to me. -- Brian Murray
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
This is the launchpad-users mailing list archive — see also the general help for Launchpad.net mailing lists.
(Formatted by MHonArc.)