On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 22:49 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:59:07 -0600 > schrieb Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > Commenting on bugs after they are closed will just annoy the > > developer. If you have an issue with the fix or something, reopening > > is the right action. If you have information to add, then add it to > > the wiki, as THAT is the source of documentation, not flyspray > > But the wiki is for documentations, not for comments on a bug report or > closure. > > As long as it is possible to reopen a bug commenting on closed bugs is > not necessary. But there are bug trackers which don't allow reopening > but writing comments on closed bugs. I think this is a matter of taste. > > What's more important is, that bugs aren't closed at once without > asking for more details and an answer of the reporter. I guess in most > cases there's a reason why a bug is reported. > > Greetings, > Heiko Considering the trade-offs between:- 1. Allowing re-opening of bugs 2. Allowing comments on closed bugs 3. Bugs shouldn't be closed without a request for details. I'd think 3 is much more sensible. 1. and 2. would just annoy the developer assigned to the bug, and in my mind the 'closing' of a bug should be basically a 'delete thread' operation. I guess it would be good for a simple system where if a bug cannot be reproduced its marked/commented as 'cannot reproduce, please provide proof/details' and placed on a 7-day (arbitrary number) wait, where no more comments would automatically close the bug. Not sure if its possible with the backend though...
