Just because they're old doesn't make them invalid. They're just at a lower priority. Closing them for the sake of closing them seems like a bad idea.
But if they're actually invalid now, that's an entirely different notion. Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity. On Apr 19, 2014 12:42 PM, "David Medinets" <david.medin...@gmail.com> wrote: > ACCUMULO-483 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-483>, for > example, involves creating a purge locality utility. However, there have > been no comments since Oct 2012. If the feature has not risen in priority > since then, how will it become more important in the future. Perhaps a > 'good ideas' page or 'roadmap' page could be added to > http://accumulo.apache.org/? I don't see a benefit to keeping these old > tickets. > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Corey Nolet <cjno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Some of these tickets still look like very valid feature/integration > > requests that would still be reasonable to have. > > > > See ACCUMULO-74, ACCUMULO-143, ACCUMULO-136, ACCUMULO-211, ACCUMULO-483, > > ACCUMULO-490, ACCUMULO-508 > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: > > > > > Deleting tickets is a no-no, but flagging them is certainly fine. > > > On Apr 19, 2014 12:03 AM, "David Medinets" <david.medin...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Opps. Sorry, I did my filtering badly. There are 68 tickets over 2 > > years > > > > old. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-18?jql=project%20%3D%20ACCUMULO%20AND%20status%20in%20%28Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22%29%20AND%20created%20%3C%3D%20-104w%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20ASC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 12:01 AM, David Medinets > > > > <david.medin...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-551?jql=project%20%3D%20ACCUMULO%20AND%20created%20%3C%3D%20-104w%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC > > > > > > > > > > Is there a technique we can use to curate old tickets? Would anyone > > > mind > > > > > if I review them and nominate tickets for closure? I can add a > > message > > > > and > > > > > delete any tickets that don't provoke a response. How useful are > > > tickets > > > > > that are two years old? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
