[Libreoffice-qa] Bugzilla: Adding new Status for 'abandoned' bugs?
bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Mon Nov 9 11:29:44 PST 2015
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 09:23:20AM -0800, Joel Madero wrote:
> > * ABANDONED
> > * INSUFFICIENT DATA (RedHat)
> > * EXPIRED (Launchpad)
> Of these I like ABANDONED as it indicates that the user abandoned
> his/her own bug. Insufficient Data is really wordy to me, Expired
> indicates that the user could just set the bug back to UNCONFIRMED and
> say "this is still a valid bug" (mistaking "expired" for "fixed" or some
> other such thing).
Hmm, yeah. So my preference is EXPIRED followed closely by ABANDONED and last
INSUFFICIENT DATA. I already wrote my considerations about INSUFFICIENT DATA in
the other subthread.
Why do I prefer EXPIRED over ABANDONED? The first is less loaded with emotion,
while the latter implies some kind of guilt (at least to me). Thus the latter
has a higher chance of provocing the reporter into blame-gaming and trying to
prove that WE abondoned the bug and not HE/SHE. Since this is intended for bugs
where we assume there wont be any productive data following, I'd think that
would be counterproductive.
N.B.: The launchpad bug states names provoke the reporter early on (NEEDINFO is
called "incomplete" which is clearer in calling the reporter into action) and
if that doesnt provide results tries to silently kill the issues (bugs get
auto-set to "expired" after 90 days of inactivity with a countdown shown as
long the bug is in "incomplete". When it happens nobody complains as launchpad
already gave those 90 days before and you had it coming.)
More information about the Libreoffice-qa