That link on "war of the closes"
is interesting reading ... thanks! Interesting to see how they "evolved"
and, how much effort was put into it!
Denis, you said "... (including
the Bugzilla UI) is starting to suck, and I've already begun selling the
idea to the powers that be. "
Can you say more? Are you thinking of
replacing bugzilla? Or just customizing its UI? ... and possibly fields?
I ask because if we are keeping or customizing
bugzilla, maybe some work could be done on the different "resolution"
fields ... if not literally the values that can be used,
perhaps at least update the standard
"bugzilla help" such as at
To give it more of meaning of how Eclipse
projects should use the fields.
Just to add to the "meanings"
already discussed, I think it should be rare for something to be marked
as "wontfix" simply because there is no resources ... an alternative
(I've used) is to set it to a low priority and add the "helpwanted"
key word. (Though, I have also used it when closing a bug that is, say,
over 5 years old where there does not seem to be the continued interest
or resources to pay further attention to it. Similarly, while "invalid"
is reasonable for something that "is not a bug" ... I think that's
different than "its not a bug, its working as designed, even though
it does not meet your expectations" (i.e. not meeting a user's expectations
is a fair reason for a bug, IMHO) plus, I've more often used "invalid"
to close a bug which is not a valid bug report ... such as those cases
where someone says only "Eclipse doesn't work for me" and requests
for more information go unanswered for several weeks.
While "my way" may not be
correct or the best way ... I'm just wondering if that's one avenue to
improve the "bugzilla experience"? Perhaps an "Architecture
Council sub-committee" could some up with some "best practices"
for Bugzilla? That was started/attempted several years ago ... but, appears
to have stalled:
Thanks for the Friday afternoon discussion,
Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>
Cross project issues
07/12/2013 02:15 PM
FW: [Doug on the Eclipse CDT] New comment on "Eclipse smells kind
that sounds like something that should be cleaned up a
reminds me of stackoverflow's recent close changes
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Igor Fedorenko <ifedorenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Just to clarify on terminology I used/implied. WONTFIX
is a real
problem which won't be fixed for lack of interest and/or resources.
INVALID when the system works as designed.
On 2013-07-13 12:57 AM, Ed Merks wrote:
I think it's even stronger than that. In the end, WONTFIX shouldn't
mean "I don't have time or I don't feel like it" but rather "it's
working as designed and changing it isn't what I believe is
appropriate". As such, even if someone provided a "fix,"
what's desired. Committers have the right and in fact an obligation
maintain design integrity; sometimes that annoys people. In
we're not obligated to spend every waking moment of every day to fix
every reported problem, though it sometimes feels that way....
On 12/07/2013 7:26 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
How is this going to help? In most/all cases bugs are
not fixed because
nobody comes forward with quality fixes. Weather somebody says "it
to be fixed" does not matter unless his/her words are backed up by
On 2013-07-12 11:50 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Get a committer from a related but independent project to review the
Bugzilla discussion to form a less prejudiced on view on whether the
WONTFIX is justified.
On 12/07/2013 17:25, Doug Schaefer wrote:
It is. And I'm sure there are hate sites for every tool
Eclipse isn't unique that way.
My point is that user experience is so important to our success, we
need to be sensitive to the issues our users are facing. There are a
lot of such issues marked WONTFIX, and CDT is as guilty of that as
anyone. I'm just wondering how we fix it.