The impending end of FC2 NEEDINFO bugs...

Stephen J. Smoogen smooge at gmail.com
Sun May 29 05:16:29 UTC 2005


It depends on the mindframe of the person I think. Originally QA was
dealing with a lot of things that no one had time to look at.. and
Mike was more of a "tell it to them bluntly" type person. In a larger
"find someone in the community to fix it" or "pony up the bennies"
style, you should take a more conversational style that gives better
explanations of why it isnt being looked at.


On 5/28/05, Warren Togami <wtogami at redhat.com> wrote:
> Stephen J. Smoogen wrote:
> >
> > CANTFIX
> >
> > This is a better answer in some cases to WONTFIX... but leads to even
> > more bugzilla choices... (Some anthropologist looking at this in 100
> > years will say "Bugzilla users like eskimos had 200 ways of saying
> > CLOSED.)
> >
> >
> 
> I think it should have been CANTFIX instead of WONTFIX from the
> beginning.  Are there really cases where CANTFIX doesn't fit a situation
> where you mean WONTFIX?
> 
> Warren Togami
> wtogami at redhat.com
> 


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
CSIRT/Linux System Administrator




More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list