[Libreoffice-qa] Stagnant NEEDINFO bugs

[Joel Madero]

This is in response to Rainer's hesitation. I think there are three 
solid reasons why this should be done and how it would help, one is for 
QA side, one is for the project as a whole and one is for general 
accuracy of FDO:

1) For QA side, if we make this a standard policy then when we push 
something to NEEDINFO we can immediately say, "this bug will remain in 
NEEDINFO state for 30 days, after which it will be closed as INVALID. 
This "could" promote users actually providing information, if they know 
that their bug will go to INVALID after 30 days maybe they'll be a bit 
more rush on their side and we won't continue to accumulate NEEDINFO bugs.

2) For the project as a whole, a lot of these bugs in NEEDINFO could in 
fact be bugs but developers aren't looking at them because of something 
as simple as a missing attachment. Doing this "purge" might encourage 
people who have simply forgotten about their bugs to take the additional 
steps to make it so QA can easily confirm their bugs. Without this it is 
more than likely that the bugs have zero chance of ever being looked at 
again. It would be ashame to have known bugs on FDO but no one will ever 
look at them, doing anything that encourages the input from the reporter 
is a good thing -- I think that this does exactly that.

3) General accuracy of FDO. NEEDINFO means "maybe it's a bug, maybe it's 
not, who knows" -- I think it's important for FDO to be accurate. 
INVALID bugs actually means "this bug is not a valid bug". I think 
NEEDINFO should be a temporary status, not a status we anticipate bugs 
sitting in forever.


Best Regards,
Joel