Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2005 11:08:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
"Mike A. Harris" <mharris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Is there a reason not to leave such bugs in NEEDINFO state forever?
Yes. Then there are 100000 bugs open forever, that will never
be addressed.
Fair enough. What about adding a resolution category "closed for lack
of information", which we could use if something stays in NEEDINFO
too long? Or I suppose we could use WORKSFORME ...
NEEDINFO -> no reply -> WONTFIX : that really is the most true
resolution. Without feedback, the bug won't be fixed because it won't be
examined further. Just explain that when closing the ticket. Keep in mind
that the reporter can reopen the ticket as soon as new feedback is
provided.
I disagree. There are different ways to say the same thing, and
while "WONTFIX" is very much true, it is NOT the best way of saying
it. Or should I say instead - There are better ways of saying
"WONTFIX" that are more positive and friendly.
One could argue GO_TO_HELL is a "true" resolution for some bugs,
but is it "friendly"? Is it "proactive"? Does it give the
reporter a warm feeling in their stomach?
No.
