Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:97622
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.172 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jakub.php@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <69009349-1040-f522-ac9d-c681e66209f4@heigl.org>
References: <CAL=_i_nuF0y8TC_GrWsX5e77sP-jKq+ed374SW0e=VxSPniVjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <912debc8-14db-2a0b-02f2-ce9487bdbb5c@fedoraproject.org> <CAEKnhAEHtyc7dJBF0f6hGHdBmrKbkZx=sifZZ_Y3NVaCjAJJTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <69009349-1040-f522-ac9d-c681e66209f4@heigl.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 10:49:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CAEKnhAFGwX_qUqpcHntyFWJ89t6MCOYqfSReEvwjcGuwW+ozbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andreas Heigl <andreas@heigl.org>
Cc: Remi Collet <remi@fedoraproject.org>, PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114d6f7c11c8170545a721a0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] bugsnet cleanup
From: bukka@php.net (Jakub Zelenka)

--001a114d6f7c11c8170545a721a0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Andreas Heigl <andreas@heigl.org> wrote:

> Hi Jakub.
>
> Am 09.01.17 um 10:59 schrieb Jakub Zelenka:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Remi Collet <remi@fedoraproject.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Le 08/01/2017 =C3=A0 07:46, Joe Watkins a =C3=A9crit :
> >>
> >>> I'd like to hear what others think about cleaning up bugsnet, what
> >> criteria
> >>> we might use for a mass cleanup.
> >>
> >> Big +1 for a mass cleanup.
> >>
> >> IMHO all bugs reported against PHP < 5.6 could be cleaned.
> >
> >
> > I disagree with this as many of bugs raised before 5.6 are still valid
> bugs
> > . The reason is that the code for many extensions hasn't changed for lo=
ng
> > time. Of course there was a port to 7.0 which fixed few and also
> introduce
> > others but most of the old bugs are still valid. It would just hide
> > existing issues IMHO.
> >
> > I think that an ideal way would be to treat each bug individually and a=
t
> > least try if the issue is still present before closing or ask for
> feedback
> > if it's not clear how to try it.
>
> I can understand that and from what I've seen so far during the cleaning
> I can only say that you are right. A lot of the bugs reported for
> versions before PHP 5.6 are still open. But going through all the 3000+
> issues currently open agains PHP 5 is a LOT of effort. multiply that by
> 2 to also check whether they are still relevant.
>
> As far as I see it there simply isn't the manpower to do that. We sadly
> do not live in an ideal world but in Real Life(TM).
>
> So giving the feedback that the issue was reported against an
> unsupported version of PHP and asking the reporter to (re)open the issue
> when it still is persistent in a supported version distributes that load
> onto more shoulders.
>
>
The disadvantage of this is that we can hide many of valid bug reports as
many users won't be just bothered to open it again (especially after 10
years). I don't see a big issues to have bugs open as they actually show
where the issues are and what part needs some work. I actually believe that
it's better to have a bigger backlog so one have got a bigger choice. Of
course cleaning up the bugs that are not really bugs or are already fixed
would be very helpful. However doing that automatically and closing also
the valid ones is not the best way how to do that IMHO.

Cheers

Jakub

--001a114d6f7c11c8170545a721a0--