On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:06:03 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > Stephen J. Smoogen wrote: > > > > CANTFIX > > > > This is a better answer in some cases to WONTFIX... but leads to even > > more bugzilla choices... (Some anthropologist looking at this in 100 > > years will say "Bugzilla users like eskimos had 200 ways of saying > > CLOSED.) > > > > > > I think it should have been CANTFIX instead of WONTFIX from the > beginning. Are there really cases where CANTFIX doesn't fit a situation > where you mean WONTFIX? In cases like this, a ticket should be just "CLOSED" without a second resolution or with resolution "SEECOMMENT". The rationale for closing the bug can be added as a comment. The primary problem seems to be that the "Resolution" setting is _the_ source of misunderstandings. WONTFIX upsets users. CANTFIX makes the developers look bad.
