Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 02:09:35PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
As I did with FC2 long ago, I'm going to go through and mark all open FC3
bugs as "needinfo". This is a last-ditch attempt to make sure any of those
that really need to be addressed by Fedora Legacy get the attention they
need, and that anything still open that's still an issue in current releases
doesn't get lost forever.
So, this seems to be going pretty well. Of the 1100+ bugs, only two angry
responses about how the bug should have been fixed long ago, and quite a lot
of helpful action.
Good to know that you got helpful responses. Were the ones that got a
angry response critical ones?
So, I'm going to go and get the 148 FC1 bugs still open, which I never did.
That should be pretty straightforward -- I'll add the note that Legacy isn't
going to be doing FC1 for much longer either.
*Then*, there's the question of _before_ that. There's 1051 bugs in open
states attached to the "Red Hat Linux" and "Red Hat Linux Beta" products.
Obviously a lot of that isn't going to be helpful or interesting after all
these years -- and RHL9 is finally going out of Legacy support too. However,
it's possible that there's some overlooked important/useful/still-relevant
reports that would still apply to Fedora or RHEL.
Does it seem worth it to stir this up?
I would say close them all and let people reopen it if any of it still
applies to a currently maintained version of Fedora and/REHL . RHEL bugs
are better deal with through the formal support channels though.
Rahul
