bugzilla triage madness :-/

[Michael Schwendt]

On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:31:39 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:

> Michael Schwendt said the following on 04/05/2008 02:31 AM Pacific Time:
>  > additional work onto my shoulders from time to time. Retest against FC6,
>  > retest against F7, retest against F8, retest against F9. It's insulting.
>  >
> 
> Please point us to a bug where you saw this wording as that sounds 
> extreme and unreasonable.  Common sense for most people would warrant 
> testing against the latest version and moving on :)
> 
> It looks like the actual wording says "If you can reproduce this bug in 
> *a* maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug 
> to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED."

Okay, so you didn't get it. It's not the first time bug reporters are told
that their report has become too old. That's what I mean. It's not my
fault. When I reported something the product was either "the latest" or
"maintained". When I reported something I was willing to spend additional
time on it and e.g. answer feedback, gather details, test if need be.
It's only natural that after many months without anyone showing interest
in a report, the motivation to spend time on a report has decreased. I
fail to see the guarantee that this time a report will be dealt with. All
I see is that tickets were picked by age/by product and not by contents.

And I've explained enough in other posts in this thread.