On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Luca Toscano <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2018-03-26 11:35 GMT+02:00 Nick Kew <[email protected]>: >> >> > As hackathon project it could be good to review some of those >> > older-than-2011 tasks and see which ones are good to keep and which ones >> > can >> > be closed for no-activity/stale/not-valid-anymore/etc.. >> >> Good idea. Deal collectively with some of those judgement-calls that >> stump a solo bug-blitz. >> >> What we perhaps also need is a review of our bugzilla categories and >> workflow. >> For example, sometimes a PR is submitted with a proposed patch likely to >> be useful >> for some but not appropriate for inclusion in standard HTTPD. I’ve always >> left those >> open, which leaves them as not-bugs in the bugzilla count. Maybe we could >> deal >> with those with a new RESOLVED category (RESOLVED-PATCH?) and update the >> docs to invite users to search patch-bugs? >> > > We could also use http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/patches/ to collect > those, and then link them in bugzilla closing the task (one should be able > to find them if searching etc...). Those patches would get stale very soon > though, so not sure what's best; ideally a patch is either accepted or not, > and the correspondent task eventually closed to avoid polluting whoever is > triaging/resolving the open ones :)
Because these are not "published" by httpd (due to not being appropriate), the /dist/httpd/ tree is very problematic. If a patches tree of "interesting things under consideration" is needed, that would fit better under the httpd.a.o/dev/ tree.
