On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Carl Gaudreault <carl.gaudreault@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>So It seems Carl G. has been closing several bugs across multiple >>components without comment recently. Hmm. Not cool. > > -jef > > I gave the reason why i closed it. Are you saying that you comment in 27 requesting the report file a report upstream bug in bug 531464 is meant to be taking as rationale for closing the fedora ticket as WONTFIX? Its not clear from my reading of the comment that is your intention. Nor is it clear to me that this is an appropriate best practise to do in general even if this is what you intended. Doubly-so if the person doing the closures isn't listed as a co-maintainer or an upstream developer. I certainly leave bugs in an open state until I or one of my co-maintainers makes a judgement call which mandates a wontfix resolution. This looks like a real issue..a tough one to track down..but still potentially fixable. Neither cantfix nor wontfix seem to apply... nor does notabug. There's nothing here in the commentary that suggests to me this is a wontfix situation if someone was able to provide an upstreamable patch that could be integrated into our packages. > > Also, RHBZ number you are referring to? Do you want a complete listing? I can talk to you about the pattern of behaviour offlist. I have concerns about some of your other recent wontifx/notabug closures. Your insufficient information closures seem to be reasonable as well as more than reasonably justified in the comments. -jef -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
