Mailing List Archive

On Wed, 16 Feb 2022, Stefan Eissing wrote:

> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>
> WONTFIX
> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>
> ideally as an automated job somewhere?

I'd suggest a two-step process with STALLED or similar as a first step
(including explanations/reasoning on why it's done, and suggestions on
how to help the issue along), and then the WONTFIX close if nothing
happens.

Just automatically closing issues out without warning might be
considered rude, and likely deter affected individuals from reporting
further issues. At least, I find such projects rude.


/Nikke
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n}.umu.se | nikke@acc.umu.se
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feature : BUG with seniority.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On 2/16/22 10:32 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>
> WONTFIX
> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>
> ideally as an automated job somewhere?

What is the issue with keeping them open? I guess this would be the most honest choice. If we decide deliberately that we don't
want to do something we can close it explicitly as WONTFIX.
Otherwise I think we have no one in our back that forces us to close tickets within a particular time frame to meet whatever KPI :-)


Regards

Rüdiger

Le 16/02/2022 à 10:32, Stefan Eissing a écrit :
> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>
> WONTFIX
> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>
> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan

Hi,

I share Rüdiger point of view.

However, in the past, there has already been some mass updates (random
example BZ 55039)
It has been done more than 1 year after the official EOL of the 2.2.x
branch and only targeted 2.0.x and 2.2.x bugs.

I'm fine with the extensive explanation added and with the timing, long
enough after EOL.

This approach could be refined with mass closing old entries tagged
against HEAD.
For example in BZ 41088, 2.5-HEAD was certainly not against the actual
2.5 when opened in 2006.

Such mass-updates can be done directly within the bugzilla HMI. Not sure
if it requires some special rights, but should it need some special
karma, some of us already have it.

CJ

> Am 16.02.2022 um 14:12 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpluem@apache.org>:
>
>
>
> On 2/16/22 10:32 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>>
>> WONTFIX
>> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>>
>> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
>
> What is the issue with keeping them open? I guess this would be the most honest choice. If we decide deliberately that we don't
> want to do something we can close it explicitly as WONTFIX.
> Otherwise I think we have no one in our back that forces us to close tickets within a particular time frame to meet whatever KPI :-)

No KPI in my mind! ;-)

My intention is to free us from collective decisions and let us focus on the work relevant.
Having a "collective decision to WONTFIX" is exactly what is not happening, because we already
have enough to do and things that no one bothers about should not take more time. We should
not spend coordination efforts on things no one wants to work on.

WONTFIX is rarely an individual decision (aside from the occasional Roy veto), so issues
simply clutter up and rot on bugzilla. How many of us scan the list of open bug reports
regularly? I had one look when I joined and thought "okaaaayy, this is some Augeas stable
and I'm not Hercules!"

And "honest", from my view, would be to tell reporters:
"look, if no one has worked on this by now, it is most likely that no one will just
by itself. We are volunteers on our free time. It might not have appeared as important
to us. We may have missed the implications/seriousness.
If this issue is important to you, here is what we advise you as possible follow ups: ..."

If indeed an auto-wontfix seems to harsh for you, how about:

- add STALE as bug status
- set reports to STALE after n months of inactivity.
- anyone can close STALE issues where we wait for a reply
from the bug submitter.

Kind Regards,
Stefan

>
> Regards
>
> Rüdiger

Based on little my experience, an issue I reported in 2015 was
recently fixed in 2.4.50 6 years later, so not sure if WONTFIX is the
ideal thing for something who didn't get attention, as it may get
attention later, I agree with the "it is rude '' opinion to mark
something not attented as WONTFIX. STALE though sounds ok and
truthful.

Cheers

El jue, 17 feb 2022 a las 10:58, Stefan Eissing (<stefan@eissing.org>) escribió:
>
>
>
> > Am 16.02.2022 um 14:12 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpluem@apache.org>:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/16/22 10:32 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> >> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
> >>
> >> WONTFIX
> >> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
> >>
> >> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
> >
> > What is the issue with keeping them open? I guess this would be the most honest choice. If we decide deliberately that we don't
> > want to do something we can close it explicitly as WONTFIX.
> > Otherwise I think we have no one in our back that forces us to close tickets within a particular time frame to meet whatever KPI :-)
>
> No KPI in my mind! ;-)
>
> My intention is to free us from collective decisions and let us focus on the work relevant.
> Having a "collective decision to WONTFIX" is exactly what is not happening, because we already
> have enough to do and things that no one bothers about should not take more time. We should
> not spend coordination efforts on things no one wants to work on.
>
> WONTFIX is rarely an individual decision (aside from the occasional Roy veto), so issues
> simply clutter up and rot on bugzilla. How many of us scan the list of open bug reports
> regularly? I had one look when I joined and thought "okaaaayy, this is some Augeas stable
> and I'm not Hercules!"
>
> And "honest", from my view, would be to tell reporters:
> "look, if no one has worked on this by now, it is most likely that no one will just
> by itself. We are volunteers on our free time. It might not have appeared as important
> to us. We may have missed the implications/seriousness.
> If this issue is important to you, here is what we advise you as possible follow ups: ..."
>
> If indeed an auto-wontfix seems to harsh for you, how about:
>
> - add STALE as bug status
> - set reports to STALE after n months of inactivity.
> - anyone can close STALE issues where we wait for a reply
> from the bug submitter.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
>
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Rüdiger
>


--
Daniel Ferradal
HTTPD Project
#httpd help at Libera.Chat

Should there be a distinction between "we're waiting on more user
information, but didn't receive any" and "we have everything we need, but
no one is working on it"?

I reckon "STALE" would be good for the former (and then close as WONTFIX in
due time), but closing actual bugs just because no one looked into them
seems weird.

Speaking only for the docs bugs, I have recently looked through them,
and while many of them are in the "older than a year" basket, almost all
of them are still valid - just we haven't had time to address them yet.
It would be a shame to lose this information, as it's what I pick away
at when I have spare moments now and then.

--Rich

On 2/16/22 04:32, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>
> WONTFIX
> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>
> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan

Thanks all who participated. Almost all of you seem to be happy with the way things are. I rest my case. ????

Kind Regards,
Stefan

> Am 19.02.2022 um 23:59 schrieb Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>:
>
> Speaking only for the docs bugs, I have recently looked through them, and while many of them are in the "older than a year" basket, almost all of them are still valid - just we haven't had time to address them yet. It would be a shame to lose this information, as it's what I pick away at when I have spare moments now and then.
>
> --Rich
>
> On 2/16/22 04:32, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>> WONTFIX
>> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
>> Kind Regards,
>> Stefan

That's not entirely fair...

We have done this periodically, by spamming the bugzilla entries with
"please review under a current version and report back."

Hearing no response after a month, it's trivial to close them for more
info needed. Many aren't applicable to the current revision.

The reporters who want to be heard will respond, and that will
percolate the interesting bugs from the configuration mistakes and
other common confusion points.

Few projects of this scope ever get to inbox 0 state, so a ping to
ensure it is a valid report and draw attention to the most significant
defects is appropriate, I and several others have done this exercise
many times, clearing as many as 1,000 issues or so over the course of
a month or two. But a completely automated process simply closing them
would be considered rude, unless the reporter themself can reopen them
(and the closure message should state that.)

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 3:13 AM Stefan Eissing <stefan@eissing.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks all who participated. Almost all of you seem to be happy with the way things are. I rest my case. ????
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
>
> > Am 19.02.2022 um 23:59 schrieb Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>:
> >
> > Speaking only for the docs bugs, I have recently looked through them, and while many of them are in the "older than a year" basket, almost all of them are still valid - just we haven't had time to address them yet. It would be a shame to lose this information, as it's what I pick away at when I have spare moments now and then.
> >
> > --Rich
> >
> > On 2/16/22 04:32, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> >> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
> >> WONTFIX
> >> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
> >> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
> >> Kind Regards,
> >> Stefan
>

On 2/23/22 04:12, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> That's not entirely fair...
>
> We have done this periodically, by spamming the bugzilla entries with
> "please review under a current version and report back."
>
> Hearing no response after a month, it's trivial to close them for more
> info needed. Many aren't applicable to the current revision.
>
> The reporters who want to be heard will respond, and that will
> percolate the interesting bugs from the configuration mistakes and
> other common confusion points.

Most of our docs bug reporters never reengage with the issue. They find
a problem, report it, and then go find solutions on Reddit or
Stackoverflow or whatever, and ignore any further request for detail,
because they've already solved *their* problem.

I'll try to do another run through of the open doc bugs in the next week
or so, and close the ones that appear to be stale. Just haven't had time
for the last few ... um ... years.

> Few projects of this scope ever get to inbox 0 state, so a ping to
> ensure it is a valid report and draw attention to the most significant
> defects is appropriate, I and several others have done this exercise
> many times, clearing as many as 1,000 issues or so over the course of
> a month or two. But a completely automated process simply closing them
> would be considered rude, unless the reporter themself can reopen them
> (and the closure message should state that.)
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 3:13 AM Stefan Eissing <stefan@eissing.org> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks all who participated. Almost all of you seem to be happy with the way things are. I rest my case. ????
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Stefan
>>
>>> Am 19.02.2022 um 23:59 schrieb Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>:
>>>
>>> Speaking only for the docs bugs, I have recently looked through them, and while many of them are in the "older than a year" basket, almost all of them are still valid - just we haven't had time to address them yet. It would be a shame to lose this information, as it's what I pick away at when I have spare moments now and then.
>>>
>>> --Rich
>>>
>>> On 2/16/22 04:32, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>> How about we close stale issues on our bugzilla after a year without changes with
>>>> WONTFIX
>>>> We are sorry, but no one found the interest/time to work on this.
>>>> ideally as an automated job somewhere?
>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>> Stefan
>>