On 11/06/2010 12:01 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 11/6/2010 11:42 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:38:22 +0100, Georg Brandl<g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote:
Am 06.11.2010 05:44, schrieb Ezio Melotti:
Hi,

On 05/11/2010 19.08, Python tracker wrote:
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2010-10-29 - 2010-11-05)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/

To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the
issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.

Issues counts and deltas:
open 2514 (+17)

This seems wrong. A default search for open issues returns 2452 and it
was about the same yesterday just a few hours after the report.

closed 19597 (+78)
total 22111 (+95)

as suggested in recent mails[0][1] I changed these values to represent
the deltas with the previous week.
Now let's try to keep the "open" delta negative ;)

Since there were more issues closed than opened I think it really was.
Anyway, we are down 300 from the 2750 peak.

Current status from the tracker...

   don't care:     22134
   not closed:      2491
   not selected:       1

   open:            2451
   languishing:       25
   pending:           39
   closed:         19604


That gives us...

     2451 open
        1 not selected
       39 pending
       25 languishing
     ----
     2516 Total open


     2451 open
       39 languishing
        1 not selected
     ----
     2491 total "not closed"


     19604 closed
      2491 not closed
        39 pending
     -----
     22134 Total issues



My guess as to how this got this way, is that different fields were merged at some time where the meanings didn't quite match up. <shrug>


It would be nicer if...

   closed + not_closed = total issues

   closed + open + not_selected = total issues


Pending and languishing should be keywords or sub categories of open.

Cheers,
   Ron





_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to