It'd also be nice to see a more receptive approach to bug reports. It's concerning that so many legitimate bug reports get labelled as bogus for whatever reason.
On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 10:20 AM, Matthew Fonda wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Paul Dragoonis <dragoo...@gmail.com > (mailto:dragoo...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Christopher Jones > > <christopher.jo...@oracle.com (mailto:christopher.jo...@oracle.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 01/24/2012 03:11 PM, Justin Martin wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > With some frequency, I find bugs which are not "bogus", so much as they > > > > are reported based on a misunderstanding. Usually this happens for > > > > documentation problems, where someone has misunderstood what the > > > > documentation says, or hasn't read the documentation > > > > thoroughly enough. > > > > > > > > I'd like to propose simply changing the term "bogus" to "not-bug". This > > > > would more politely and clearly indicate the nature of the way the bug > > > > is > > > > being closed, in addition to the comment that one ordinarily leaves. > > > > > > > > Those I've spoken to in php.doc agree. Any objections? > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Justin Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 on this. It's time for a new, more collaborative approach. > > > > Sure, I'll +1 on this. The "bogus" implies "RTFM, bitch", which isn't > > professional at all :-) > > > > > I've felt this way for a long time. Big +1 on changing this. > > Cheers, > --Matthew > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
