From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: debbugs.gnu.org: is it user-centric or developer-centric? Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:35 -0500 Message-ID: <9y4r7vx74.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87mwcmb8nx.fsf@violet.siamics.net> <87r3wz7h0e.fsf@violet.siamics.net> <87bno33uli.fsf_-_@violet.siamics.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416423229 27378 80.91.229.3 (19 Nov 2014 18:53:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 18:53:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ivan Shmakov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 19 19:53:42 2014 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 1XrANp-0000nN-VT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:53:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60202 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrANp-0006Fp-MS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50553) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrANl-0006Fj-VV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:38 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrANl-0006YD-1C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:37 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56534) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrANk-0006Y9-UZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:36 -0500 Original-Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrANj-0000fL-TB; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:36 -0500 X-Spook: satellite imagery Forte Saudi Arabia emc Abu Ghraib X-Ran: 0B3}Z0U/3n7!3x:}3JXYCIdz_&\e!n$d.[Wy}t{[ZRf)w#e3uZ%Jxf/R%#>S$3<]5an 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:177806 Archived-At: Ivan Shmakov wrote: > debbugs.gnu.org? Specifically, per my prior experience with the > Debian BTS, the issues which the developers do not consider > worth fixing, but which are otherwise valid, are tagged > 'wontfix', but /not/ closed. https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00779.html [...] if the bug isn't open to discussion, I close it. I think that's fairly common across Debian. If it's tagged wontfix but still open, that generally means one of two things: either it's still open for discussion, but the maintainers are indicating their current thinking on it, or it's a commonly-reported false positive (from the maintainer's perspective) and they're leaving it open so that people will see it in the bug list and see that someone else already reported it. Seems like a good summary to me. We have 1000s of bugs. Closing ones that are never going to go anywhere is essential.