[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
debbugs.gnu.org: is it user-centric or developer-centric?
From: |
Ivan Shmakov |
Subject: |
debbugs.gnu.org: is it user-centric or developer-centric? |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Nov 2014 18:37:13 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
Could someone please clarify on the proper usage of
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.
The rationale behind that is that the issues both remain visible
to the /users/ of the package, /and/ are known to be “dealt
with” (in a way) to the developers.
Recently, two of my bug reports filed against Emacs (#17959 and
#19109, specifically) were closed without the issues being
actually fixed. This makes them eligible for archiving, which
will hide them from the (default) BTS view.
Granted, Debian BTS was established to serve /both/ the
developers /and/ the users of the package (or at least it’s my
reading of the Debian Social Contract.) I thus wonder if my
experience is applicable to the Debbugs instance run by the GNU
project; or if that instance is instead targeted primarily at
developers, and thus merely sharing the knowledge of the
existing issues (including those arising from some “singular
usage pattern”, so to say) among the users is out of its scope?
TIA.
>>>>> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> Ivan Shmakov <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:
>>> So I'm closing this.
>> I have no objections to classifying this as ‘wontfix’, but I’d
>> rather keep this opened for the issue to remain visible to the
>> community. (FWIW, http://debbugs.gnu.org/ hides closed issues by
>> default.)
I stand corrected: merely closing the bug doesn’t hide it from
the public view. However, it makes the bug eligible for
archiving, and the archived bugs /do/ get hidden by default.
> That's the point of closing bugs reports -- so that other maintainers
> don't have to bother with them.
Wouldn’t ‘wontfix’ be enough for that?
> Closing again.
--
FSF associate member #7257 http://boycottsystemd.org/ … 3013 B6A0 230E 334A
- debbugs.gnu.org: is it user-centric or developer-centric?,
Ivan Shmakov <=