2010/7/28 Gaetano Giunta <[email protected]>: > Kristof Coomans wrote: >> >> Hi Bertrand >> >> 2010/7/28 Bertrand Dunogier<[email protected]>: >>> >>> 2010/7/28 Kristof Coomans<[email protected]> >>>> >>>> 2010/7/28 Björn Dieding<[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> I would say, they should be reopened. >>> >>> Well, please do, and update the affected version (see below). >>>> >>>>> Betreff: [Sdk-public] Valid enhancement requests / issues being closed >>>>> in the issue tracker >>>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> I am quite concerned that good and valid enhancement requests / issues >>>>> (some examples: http://issues.ez.no/IssueView.php?Id=10489, >>>>> http://issues.ez.no/IssueView.php?Id=14199) are currently being closed >>>>> as won't fix or invalid because there was no feedback for a while. Is >>>>> this the current policy? >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> Kristof >>>> >>>> Now I see issues being closed with this message: >>>> >>>> "eZ Publish has undergone a >>>> substantial rewrite in the transition from PHP4 to PHP5, which may >>>> invalidate old issues." >>>> >>>> This is IMHO a big lie. There did not happen a rewrite >>>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewrite_%28programming%29) in the >>>> transition from PHP 4 to PHP 5. >>>> >>>> I understand you might want to close certain issues because you simply >>>> don't want to implement them, but please don't hide then behind such >>>> statements which are not correct. >>> >>> It's not really my role to answer that, but since we're facing an >>> IssueGate >>> affair here... >>> We have 3 thousand open issues, including about 1000 that weren't updated >>> since december 2007 (release date for 4.0). If we close all of these in >>> an >>> automated way, which is what we intend to do, we will be left with about >>> 1400 issues to handle, and this is already more than we can handle. >>> As said in the message, and that is the part I do believe you have >>> removed >>> when quoting us, >> >> I only quoted the part that really bothered me. I was myself very >> closely involved in the process of making eZ Publish compatible with >> PHP 5 (even initiated it in case you don't remember), and this had >> nothing to do with a "rewrite" like it is being called in the message >> I quoted. >>> >>> From the message it sounded like eZ Publish for PHP 5 has been build >> >> from the ground up (to quote "rewrite" from wikipedia: the act or >> result of writing new source code to replace an existing program) and >> therefore the issues reported are probably not valid anymore because >> it is a new product, which is not true at all. >> >>> we are perfectly okay with the authors, or anyone else, >>> re-opening the issues if they are still considered valid. >>> Now, we perfectly know that there hasn't been a big ass rewrite of eZ >>> Publish since versions 3.x, but it still has undergone massive changes >>> in >>> many areas, and it is very likely that lots of issues are now invalid >> >> Massive changes only in the areas of WebDav, Mail and admin interface >> AFAIK, up to 4.3 (in eZ Publish itself, not taking eZ Systems >> extensions into account, the issues I am talking about have mostly >> nothing to do with them). >> >>> I know some of them aren't, but if they are, just reopen them and update >>> the >>> affected versions. >> >> AFAIK regular issue reporters are not able to reopen any issue they >> are encountering. >> And the actual message was this: >> >> "open a new one against a currently supported version of eZ Publish if the >> issue can be reproduced on a new version of eZ Publish." >> >> So I would have to create a new issue for what was reported before and >> was not looked at properly by the development/support team? >> >> My point is that people won't bother anymore to create a new issue if >> they reported something a long time ago and there was never payed >> enough attention by eZ Systems to what they reported. >> >> Please, focus a bit more on quality than on quantity. > > I will not voice for any of the particular issues that have been closed in > the past days, but setting up a script to automatically close bugs that have > been left in 'pending for feedback' state for a certain time is a widely > accepted practice.
Not all of the issues that were closed were "waiting for feedback" as far as I can see. Kristof -- Sdk-public mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ez.no/mailman/listinfo/sdk-public
