On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/04/2011 09:35 PM, JM wrote: >> >> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis<grbzks@xxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> JM<fijam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> I have browsed through all High and Medium severity bugreports and >>>> categorized some of them here: >>>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Fijam . >>>> >>>> 'Candidates for closing' are divided into two categories: strong and >>>> weak. Strong candidates have not been replied to in over 4 months >>>> (with some bugs seeing no activity for over a year) with the last >>>> comment asking for more information or confirmation whether the bug >>>> still persists. I have not yet started issuing closure requests but >>>> will do so in two weeks if noone replies to those reports. Weak >>>> candidates have not been replied to in less than four months, the >>>> resolution of the bug was unclear or the original submitter found >>>> another solution and failed to provide any more information. I will >>>> wait for another month before issuing closure requests. Note: jelle >>>> van der waa (jelly) asked for confirmation on many of those bugs and >>>> deserves all the praise. >>>> >>>> I have also identified some bugs where more input or a confirmation of >>>> a fix is needed and asked for it. Will try to do initial triaging on >>>> those bugs or mark them as candidates for closing if the submitter >>>> fails to respond. >>>> >>>> There was also a couple of bug reports that seemed to be going >>>> nowhere. There was either a failure in communication, unresolved >>>> argument, a patch with no feedback from the developers or a request to >>>> split a bug into two or more specific reports. These should probably >>>> be reviewed again. >>>> >>>> There are still Low and Very Low severity bugs to go through, so >>>> perhaps some other user wants to pick up where I left :) >>> >>> Thanks for doing this. You could have used the already set up >>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Bug_Day_TODO page though instead of >>> your user page. >>> That might need a bit of cleaning up but if you're willing to transfer >>> properly the ones on your page there i will help with this if you lack >>> the time to invest doing the clean up yourself. >>> >>> ---- >>> Greg >>> >> I have seen this page but it is a bit of a mess. I will clean it up >> and merge both lists during the weekend, possibly adding a category >> 'candidates for removal' based on my own criteria if that's OK. >> >> JM > > I have been trying to get the bugtracker a bit cleaned up, there are a lot > of kernel related bugs which are reported with a version < 2.6.35. > Most of these bugs are 'waiting on response' and I'd say they should be > closed. > > -- > Jelle van der Waa > > I have updated the list at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Bug_Day_TODO. It would be great if someone wanted to browse through Low and Very Low severity bugs in Arch Linux and Community Packages as I have only browsed through High and Medium. Cheers, JM
