Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90667
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.173 as permitted sender)
To: Dan Ackroyd <danack@basereality.com>,
 "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CA+kxMuSbgyzQ14j+YeVJo6a1ephgvB9tmjr35Ty7VTB2=2y_dw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56994046.3080605@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:53:58 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+kxMuSbgyzQ14j+YeVJo6a1ephgvB9tmjr35Ty7VTB2=2y_dw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Close some old issues
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

> However there are lots of issues open from 'a while ago' that are
> either not really bug requests, or are too old to investigate.

Bug db also has feature requests. Which are fine, even if nobody does
them now, people may do in the future.

> I don't think having them kept open is providing any value, and it
> makes it harder to find actual issues that need fixing in the issue
> database, so I'd like to close some of them.

Bug DB triage is a hard, long and often thankless work. I am very
thankful to you for spending your time on it.

> bugs, or are too old to investigate. (e.g. A crash bug on PHP 4.3.9 is
> not something that anyone should be looking at.)

I would say if it has reproduction, it should be checked on 5.5 still,
unless it is hard (like installing complex software, etc.). Just to be
sure. If no clear reproduction, close it.
For extensions (such as https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=57735) it's
harder because we don't know support status of those. It may be a real
bug but the extension is not maintained anymore.

> If anyone with wants to keep any of these issues open, please could
> you assign them to yourself? Or leave a comment on the issue saying

I'm not sure if we should be closing small feature requests. Unless it
is clear that we *never*, ever going to implement it (e.g. "Drop the $
prefix" would fit in the category ;)
But otherwise features should be pretty easy to filter out?
Anyway, I'll review the list and maybe change my mind :)

Those that do require RFC I think is fine to close. Maybe have a
standard text for that - like "This request describes a change that is
substantial enough to warrant an RFC. Please read <link> and submit an
RFC for the consideration for the community".

Thanks,
-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com