> * Someone is likely to report the same problem again > * There's clear directions on how to reproduce an undesired behavior > * There been a proposed plan of action recently > > And many tickets can be ruled out: > > * Vague feature requests > * Not enough details / difficult to reproduce > * Exceptionally old proposals / plans
Yeah, I'm on board with these. I'd probably interpret them more conservatively than you towards closing more tickets, but that's fine. As you have volunteered to take this one, I'd say you get to make the call: just go through and port over what you think makes sense along those lines. As one additional piece, let's also think about some tags to use for classifying tickets, including one for what's good tasks for newcomers who want to get into the code. (In principle I also like Alan's suggestion of moving everything over and then just close them out so that the history remains. But I'm afraid that couldn't be automated easily and would then just be too much work.) > starting with a clean slate on GitHub now only means it's likely to > eventually end up in the same situation as JIRA later. What then? > Move to another tracker again? Doesn't need to be as drastic: as some people here can confirm, I have no problem doing extensive sweeps if things get too overwhelming. :-) But yes, point taken, my hope is that we can stay on top of things on the new tracker and make an effort to get stuff addressed and resolved. We'll see. :) Robin -- Robin Sommer * ICSI/LBNL * ro...@icir.org * www.icir.org/robin _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev