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
> 
> 


Reply via email to