On 2015-09-16 06:05, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
The main difference is whether existing bugs are reassigned or simply closed.
Speaking as a user (and not a developer), little is more annoying than encountering a bug, spending time to research, reproduce and document a bug experienced in the current version, only to have it closed as DONTCARE and NOBODYLOOKED at a later date.
I know that that isn't the intent here, and bugs against old versions often get fixed as code is updated and re-factored, and as such, bug reports often don't age well.
Most open source projects aren't too bad, there are some that make it clear that only developer time is respected and no other contributions are valued, when the reality is that open source has the same need of QA, documentation and other time contributions that commercial software requires. At the same time, I understand what it can feel like to have a mountain of mostly-useless bugs that don't even apply to the current codebase, so there isn't any easy solution.
So while I don't have a specific suggestion, I might encourage at least a cursory review of the bugs to determine which might still apply vs which are in code that was significantly refactored or otherwise likely resolved.
(In all cases, bugs logged against versions which are out of support can definitely be closed immediately, if not blocked entirely)
-- Dave Warren http://www.hireahit.com/ http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
