Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Jul 2008 02:06:10 +0300 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.26-rc9: Reported regressions from 2.6.25 |
| |
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 03:27:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > When did you tell me that maintainers should not or cannot be Cc'ed on > > regression reports? > > That is not what I'm complaining about.
That is what I wrote in the part of my email you made this comment on.
> I'm complaining about the fact that you *always* argue against closing > bugreports.
I'm not always against closing bugs, and e.g. during the last years I've closed at about 500 bugs in the kernel Bugzilla due to submitters having vanished.
> You have argued against it for over a YEAR now. And every single time I > tell you that you are wrong, and exactly *why* you are wrong. > > If a reporter doesn't respond to say "it's still open", it needs to be > closed. It doesn't matter one whit whether there has been developer action > on it or not. We cannot keep old reports open - it's a total waste for > developers to even _look_ at anything that is more than roughly a month > old and hasn't been verified to be still be an issue.
We only differ on whether a human should ask this question once before closing a bug or whether regular automated requests are enough.
E.g. although Andrew has't responded to Rafaels emails for nearly a month whether the slab corruption he reported is still present I wouldn't take this as a definitive indication that he won't answer when someone has a question. I'd bet Andrew will answer if a human asks him about the status of this regression.
A developer asking manually "Is this still present?" does cost nearly no time and gives the submitter a much better feeling than only automated emails and then a bug close.
> Linus
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
| |