5 ms·

* Don't close bug reports just because they're old. A bug report is either good or bad - that is, the bug is either reproducible or it isn't. A bad bug report i

by jsight 7y ago

* Don't close bug reports just because they're old. A bug report is either good or bad - that is, the bug is either reproducible or it isn't. A bad bug report is bad from the start; close it quickly - or else, don't close it just because enough time has passed. (This goes doubly for bug reports with advice.) I disagree... lots of bug reports actually are not bad at all, but are also not something that you want to prioritize. If multiple parties look at a bug report repeatedly for years and do not prioritize it, its a pretty good sign that it is something that will not be done. Closing bugs that aren't going to be done is a good thing, but it isn't always such an obvious decision on day 1. Of course, they can always be reopened (or duplicated) if the situations change.

FeepingCreature 7y ago
Well, then the bug stays open. :shrug: Why is that so bad? The only reason I can see to close old bugs is that a project wants to make it seem like it has fewer issues than it does, and hopes that users won't notice the issue.
- dspillett 7y ago
  > and hopes that users won't notice the issue It is a little more than that in many cases. People judging a project overall by the number of open bugs reports, no matter how minor, isn't really fair if there is considerable development on more important bugs/features/other elsewhere in the project.
  - beart 7y ago
    It also isn't fair for people who assume a project that has a large number of closed issues is highly active, when in fact, a large number of those issues have just never seen any activity and were closed for being stale.
    - dspillett 7y ago
      If the issues are closed with WONTFIX or similar status, as discussed nearby in this thread, then it should still be clear that something is going on. It is then up to the reader to decide if that something is enough for them to worry about or not.
dspillett 7y ago
That isn't closing them "just because they're old" though. That is closing them in a "WONTFIX" state. This is perfectly valid for minor irritations or matters that the maintainers don't agree are bugs at all, though some (entitled) bug reporters will take umbrage with it especially if they've taken the time to actually produce a good bug report rather than just a vague "X doesn't work" or "Y breaks Z". If closing in a WONTFIX state, a brief explanation added to the ticket is a good idea, to reduce the risk of future time wasted because it is simply reopened as a new bug. For instance: you might be closing it in that state because it will become irrelevant shortly due to other work (perhaps the feature is changing considerably which will render the issue moot), because you don't consider it a bug (i.e. behaviour by design) or fixing to some satisfactory standard is something there isn't time for (i.e. your "not ever likely to be a priority" status). In the "not ever likely to be a priority" case, perhaps suggest that a PR addressing the issue matching your coding standards (assuming you have them documented) would be welcome, though only do that if such a PR would have a change of being given the relevant assessment time.

by jsight 7y ago

FeepingCreature 7y ago

Well, then the bug stays open. :shrug: Why is that so bad? The only reason I can see to close old bugs is that a project wants to make it seem like it has fewer issues than it does, and hopes that users won't notice the issue.

dspillett 7y ago
> and hopes that users won't notice the issue It is a little more than that in many cases. People judging a project overall by the number of open bugs reports, no matter how minor, isn't really fair if there is considerable development on more important bugs/features/other elsewhere in the project.
- beart 7y ago
  It also isn't fair for people who assume a project that has a large number of closed issues is highly active, when in fact, a large number of those issues have just never seen any activity and were closed for being stale.
  - dspillett 7y ago
    If the issues are closed with WONTFIX or similar status, as discussed nearby in this thread, then it should still be clear that something is going on. It is then up to the reader to decide if that something is enough for them to worry about or not.

dspillett 7y ago

That isn't closing them "just because they're old" though. That is closing them in a "WONTFIX" state. This is perfectly valid for minor irritations or matters that the maintainers don't agree are bugs at all, though some (entitled) bug reporters will take umbrage with it especially if they've taken the time to actually produce a good bug report rather than just a vague "X doesn't work" or "Y breaks Z". If closing in a WONTFIX state, a brief explanation added to the ticket is a good idea, to reduce the risk of future time wasted because it is simply reopened as a new bug. For instance: you might be closing it in that state because it will become irrelevant shortly due to other work (perhaps the feature is changing considerably which will render the issue moot), because you don't consider it a bug (i.e. behaviour by design) or fixing to some satisfactory standard is something there isn't time for (i.e. your "not ever likely to be a priority" status). In the "not ever likely to be a priority" case, perhaps suggest that a PR addressing the issue matching your coding standards (assuming you have them documented) would be welcome, though only do that if such a PR would have a change of being given the relevant assessment time.