bugzilla triage madness :-/

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 05:41:58 -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:

> But what could be gained from trying to solve bugs in software that is long 
> modified to be unrecognizable from the state it was in then...

You presume too much. The bot didn't examine whether the software/pkg
changed too much. The bot mass-changed tickets based on age/product.

> the bugs were 
> changed to NEEDINFO so that the reporters can then go back and indicate whether 
> the bug is still relevant to anyone/them.

This particular reporter won't "go back". It is beyond my time. I've spent
time on reporting the bugs, patches, I've been available to give feedback
if need be. The tickets have been ignored. Now it's too late to expect me
to spend time on the same issues again. Why should I? It's not the first
time somebody tries to "clean up bugzilla" only to do it again a few
months later when the next tickets become "too old".

Listen, I don't want to argue with you. I've pointed out how I feel about
it and move on. For me, experience with bugzilla.redhat.com has become
worse.

> You don't need to do anything if its not something that still matters, and 
> you're not expected to.  But why would you begrudge the developers a cleaner 
> bugzilla if that doesn't matter anymore?  If you don't care to spend time on it 
> now do you really think anyone needs to?

See above. Can't be so hard to understand.