From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christian Bryant Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unanswered Emacs Problem Reports 40+ Months Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:59:55 -0700 Organization: GNU/Linux-libre Operating System Message-ID: <5268D37B.2040608@gnulinuxlibre.org> References: <52689833.7060109@gnulinuxlibre.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1382601622 13804 80.91.229.3 (24 Oct 2013 08:00:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:00:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 24 10:00:25 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VZFq9-00022W-Ir for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:00:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53154 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZFq9-0003pK-6g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 04:00:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53085) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZFpy-0003oA-Uq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 04:00:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZFpp-0007vT-Kc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 04:00:10 -0400 Original-Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.195]:44593) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZFpp-0007v8-Fe; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 04:00:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mfilter2-d.gandi.net (mfilter2-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.140]) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2BEA80E4; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:59:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter2-d.gandi.net Original-Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.195]) by mfilter2-d.gandi.net (mfilter2-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wi8gfdoxwG-Q; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:59:58 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 98.149.167.62 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.109] (cpe-98-149-167-62.socal.res.rr.com [98.149.167.62]) (Authenticated sender: christian@gnulinuxlibre.org) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 96CB6A80B8; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:59:57 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 217.70.183.195 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:164504 Archived-At: On 10/24/2013 12:46 AM, Glenn Morris wrote: > I'm not exactly sure what you are proposing to do, though. > Would this be a totally automatic process, in which every old, open bug > report simply gets a mail asking the OP to confirm it is still relevant? That was my initial intent, yes. > Because I'm not sure that is a very useful thing to do. I don't like it > when eg certain distributions automatically close all bugs filed against > previous releases unless people confirm they still exist in the latest > release. Absolutely agreed. I will be asking the reporter to confirm the problem continues to exist in the latest release. Is there a concern some users may simply close bugs without testing? >> I'll make no initial attempt to cross-reference bugs for duplication, >> fixes in later releases, or other troubleshooting efforts. > > See, I kind of think this is the thing that _should_ be done first (I've > tried to do it in the past). Once someone has filed a bug, the burden is > on us as developers to do something about it. Whether that's requesting > more info, fixing it, saying we won't fix it, saying it's not a bug, or > saying that it's not a priority right now. For 40 month old bugs and younger, I would absolutely agree. However, due to the age of the bugs I will be emailing reporters a form email on, I think it may be the best route to get some clean-up on those 68 months to 41 months old bugs. > I don't really know what's going to happen with all the old Emacs bugs > that are still open. It seems impossible to ever fix them all. > But does that mean we should just declare bankruptcy and close them? > I don't know... I would say "no" on bankruptcy, certainly. Perhaps the form email is the better of two evils? > If every person with commit access to Emacs dealt with 15 bugs, > that would be all of them. ;) Perhaps this discussion will get some folks thinking along those lines! :-) - CB