Close all old samba "3" bugzillas ?

[Jeremy Allison]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 04:39:50PM +0100, Björn JACKE via samba-technical wrote:
> On 2018-03-21 at 08:41 -0400 Simo via samba-technical sent off:
> > They may still be valid but they are clogging bugzilla needlessly and
> > if nobody is asking anything about those it means they are bugs nobody
> > cares for.
> 
> unfortunately we have plenty of valid bugs that just none of us cared for to
> look at or comment on for years even though the bug description is clear,
> sometimes even a fix it part of the bug report.
> 
> > > The age of a Samba version is not a reason for closing a bug for us.
> > 
> > I think it is, EOLed versions will not see bugfixing anyway.
> 
> nobody says that the a bug will have to be fixed in 3.0 but some bugs are still
> valid for master.
> 
> 
> > Who is we ?
> 
> those team members who took part in the discussion and argumentation
> 
> 
> > I only know that bugzilla is almost useless to find relevant bugs to
> > tackle. If bugs are not going to be fixed the *reasonable* thing to do
> > is to warn the person that opened them (and everyone else) that we are
> > not going to tackle them by closing WONTFIX/EOL and let people that
> > care about a specific bug to reopen it if they care, or just let it go
> > if they stopped caring.
> > 
> > Keeping dead bugs around serves who exactly ?
> 
> bugs are not dead just because none of the samba developers looked into or
> commented on it.  I don't disagree to close bugs that are most probably fixed
> or badly described or probably misconfigurations or...or...or. But not blindly
> closing old bugs with the comment that the version it was reported for is EOL.

Both Simo and you have a point.

However, bugs kept in the "zombie" state (even with fix attached)
are not good for the project. No one is looking at them.

If Simo were to propose deleting the data, I would agree with
Björn. But that's not what he's asking for.

Marking the bug as WONTFIX/EOL keeps the data, and allows the
bug to be ressurected if anyone looks at it, or re-raises the
issue.

IMHO marking WONTFIX/EOL is acknowleging the reality of the
situation, in that no one is going to look at pre-4.0.x
bugs unless there is end-user activity around the issue.

Just my 2cents. Maybe we should vote on this ?

Jeremy.