Re: lkml, bugme.osdl.org?

[Tupshin Harper <tupshin@tupshin.com>]

The bugzillla Dave Jones wrote:

>whilst on the subject of bugzilla:
>a few people (myself included) go through the bug database once a week
>or so pruning out-of-date/fixed entries. So far the ones I've closed have
>been quite sensible, but there are a few there of the form..
>
>"xxx doesn't work in 2.5.47", then Rusty's module rewrite happened,
>and the tester didn't (or couldn't) see if it got fixed in subsequent
>kernels. I'll send out pings to such reports when they get to something
>like 5 kernels old. If the problem then doesn't get re-ACKed, I'll
>close it. Any objections?
>
>		Dave
>
Thankfully osdl has been set up with very useful fields for such things. 
It sounds like cases that you are describing should be rejected with a 
status of either "UNREPRODUCIBLE" if the bug report was decently done, 
but you can't reproduce it, or "INSUFFICIENT_DATA" if the bug report was 
filed inadequately. This can serve as a prompt to the original filer to 
re-open it with better data.

I don't think you should hesitate to do that at least once for a bug 
fits either of those cases.

-Tupshin