It's closed because I, myself, closed it today :-) On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Brett Porter <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 20/06/2011, at 5:30 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> Since my lame attempt at humor on the last thread led to some >> confusion, I'll keep this relatively straight. >> >> Consider, if you please, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2258. >> >> For one thing, this report is marked as 'superceded by' another, but >> it's still open. What's that mean? > > That's not very helpful. I'd remove that link, or maybe make it "related". > >> >> For another, it wends it ways through various topics, ending up with a >> supposition that the OP's original problem might have, in fact, been a >> result of a more-or-less by design behavior. At least, a behavior with >> the possibility of causing havoc if lightly changed. >> >> Personally, I don't find this sort of thing helpful. I would give it >> the same treatment as discussed in the other thread. Either there's a >> concrete unwanted behavior, with a test case, or not. If there is, we >> should endeavor to resolve it in a comprehensible way. >> >> Other opinions? > > I agree with the current state - it should stay closed, and anyone that wants > to report a different case can create a new issue linking back to that one. > > If I catch a comment on a closed issue I generally tell them to start a new > one. I'll only reopen if there hasn't been a release and it can be reclosed > in a reasonable time (otherwise you mess up historical release notes). > > - Brett > > -- > Brett Porter > [email protected] > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ > http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
