Greetings,
On 5/20/2026 10:58 AM, Philippe Cloutier wrote:
Greetings,
On 5/6/2026 12:32 PM, Bowen, Rich wrote:
After some chat on Slack, I wanted to have a poll here on the idea of
closing “old” tickets, for various definitions of old. The Slack
conversation was in favor, but as that is a small subset of the
entire project, I’m hoping to get a broader consensus here. There are
several questions:
1) Do you want to auto-close tickets that are filed against 2.0?
(Data: There’s only 19 of them. The newest of these is from 2009.
https://httpd.rcbowen.com/httpd-20x-open-bugs.html)
What do you mean by "closing tickets"?
If I understand correctly, the proposal was a one-time mass manipulation
of the tickets, which has now been done
(https://lists.apache.org/thread/jgzgq99vo347yhfwfojtzh8vj2xfzp2t).
Currently, the following query approximates affected tickets:
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&f1=days_elapsed&f2=days_elapsed&list_id=224983&o1=lessthan&o2=greaterthan&order=Importance&product=Apache%20httpd-2&query_format=advanced&v1=18&v2=16
This query relies on 2 parameters focusing on 2026-05-09 which need to
be adjusted as days pass, currently set to 18 and 16.
Based on an analysis of a small sample
(https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39913 and
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20036), I infer the
modifications done were:
1. Marking issues as resolved
2. Setting RESOLUTION to WONTFIX
3. Adding a comment
In the above cases, the comment was:
Thank you for your report. Apache httpd 2.2.x reached end-of-life in December
2017 and is no longer supported. If this issue still affects Apache httpd 2.4.x
or trunk, please open a new ticket. We are closing this ticket as the affected
version is no longer maintained.
This makes no sense to me:
1. I see nothing which suggests these issues are indeed resolved.
2. I see no reason why these bugs would not be fixed.
3. The issues are reported against httpd 2, which remains supported,
not specifically against 2.2.
4. Filing a new ticket for an issue already tracked is (generally) a
Bad Idea™.
5. I see no reason to assume a single version is affected.
If the above accurately reflects the proposal, my answer is negative in
all cases. Perhaps something should be done about case #3, but again
certainly not marking all of these as resolved, and not without care
(see INFRA-27948 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-27948>).
[…]
The goal here is to make our ticket backlog less daunting, and more
appealing to contributors who want to pick meaningful stuff to work on.
I feel like this makes my personal backlog more daunting, and doubt it
could be different for others. I recommend to revert that.
--
🅭🄍:https://www.philippecloutier.com/Common+infrastructure+licensing#list
Philippe Cloutier
