> > This, however, I would find very useful - both as a -hacker
> and as a
> > user. The point is that only confirmed things should be in
> there, so
> > only confirmed things should be returned on searches and whatevr.
> > (private not as in not visible to the public, but private as in
> > write-controlled)
>
> I've yet to see a bug tracker that doesn't make it trivial to
> identify bugs that were marked as invalid (ie: not a real
> bug). The only difference is that you actually have to mark
> them as such. Given the fairly low volume of non-bugs that
> come in through the web form, I don't think marking them will
> be a big issue (and as I mentioned previously, it's something
> that doesn't have to be done by anyone who's a committer). In
> fact, having such a system would probably save committers
> time, because they could look only at bugs that had been
> confirmed as valid by someone else. Right now, every time a
> non-bug gets filed dozens of people end up reading the report
> before they hit delete.
Well, if it's invalid, it shouldn't be in there. But I guess you could
just go ahead and delete it at that point - but it's work that someone
has to do.
But when I look at a lot of OSS projects out there, I see hundreds (if
not thousands or tens of thousands for large projects) of bugs that are
just dangling. That likely aren't bugs, but they are listed as such.
Could definitly be that it's just that the system isn't maintained
properly, but if so many others have failed, there's definitly a
nontrivial risk that we would fail as well.
//Magnus