[arch-general] closed bugs, open comments?

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 11:44:46 EST 2009

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter at plaetinck.be> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:48:16 -0600
> Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Either you want to add information for justifying the cllosed bug,
>> > and in this case it's not a big deal since you basically agree that
>> > the bug should be closed. (I understand it can be a bit annoying in
>> > some cases though :))
>> > Or you want to add information against the closing of the bug : in
>> > this case, it's exactly a request to reopen.
>> I'm on Xavier's side here. And Damjan is referring to a bug I closed,
>> which was not a bug, as the directions were explained quite clearly in
>> the man page. If you think the man page is wrong, report it to the
>> upstream maintainer.
> Sometimes you just have useful information that would interest the
> original poster, the people who helped him out and/or anyone who reads
> the ticket afterwards because he has the same problem.

True but leaving comments open means more emails. As one who is
actually assigned to a lot of these bugs (and has to act on them), I
get 30ish email threads a day (not sure of individual emails - thanks
gmail!) from open bugs alone. If we start allowing comments on closed
bugs, they're going to send me emails too and the actual stuff I need
to do is going to get lost in the sea of emails.

Not allowing comments on closed bugs is about signal vs noise. I, for
one, would very much prefer as little noise as possible.

More information about the arch-general mailing list