httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Kew <>
Subject Re: Bug report for Apache httpd-2 [2006/10/08]
Date Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:24:18 GMT
On Monday 09 October 2006 07:53, Boyle Owen wrote:
> Hi all,
> Speaking as an apache user (not developer) who merely lurks on this
> list, is it appropriate for me to question the formatting (and hence
> usefulness) of this periodic report?

By all means.  You've earned karma on the users@ list, but even if
you hadn't you'd be welcome to raise the issue.  Bear in mind that
even if you don't program, you can make a really useful contribution
to our bugzilla by going through it and weeding out some of the
dross, to leave it with a better proportion of genuine bugs over noise.

Thanks for opening the debate!

> - Might the time-ordering be reversed to show the most recent, first? It
> seems a bit odd always to find, right at the top, this ancient bug about
> a CGI interpreter... Anything important is 739 bugs later. {I *know*
> that this probably means a major rehash of the code that generates the
> list and will not be simple as it sounds - then again, if it's built
> from a DB query, it might be as simple as replacing DESC with ASC..)

IMHO that's supremely unimportant.  I just delete these messages
immediately, and use the online search facility when I find myself with
time to look at bugs.

> - Is the "Status" column *ever* updated? For example, is suexec bug
> #7862 from April 2002 really "New"? Did anyone ever fix it?

It's just a database result.  Bear in mind that some old bugs really *should*
be fixed (e.g. bug 17629).  But many others are left open for altogether
different reasons:
  * They may be underspecified, so noone knows wtf they're about,
    yet noone feels confident to close them.
  * They may become irrelevant, but noone noticed.
  * They may have a patch that's useful for some users but not appropriate
    in general.  Those are left open to make it easier to find the patches.
  * They may be utterly bogus, yet the reporter just reopens them if we
    close them.

> | Total  739 bugs

That's the bottom line of what makes a flat list like this useless, IMO.

Nick Kew

View raw message