Request for discussion: lowering the backlog of old Trac tickets.

[Mojca Miklavec]

On 1 May 2018 at 02:35, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
> On 04/30/2018 07:01 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>> tickets that we cannot address, but don't explicitly close either.
>> Something like a "stale" state?
>
> "wontfix" ?

"Won't fix" sounds plain wrong for things that are real bugs or for
reasonable feature requests that just nobody had time to implement
yet.

To me, "wontfix" is something you put on a controversial patch that
should NOT be included. Ever.
Do you really want to label broken gcc 7 compiler as "wontfix"?
Do you really want to label "let's try to upgrade packages to python
3.6" as "wontfix"?
That's sending the wrong message to users and drives them away.

What we need is a way to clearly distinguish difficult upstream bugs
from easy-to-fix packaging errors (as well as a couple of other
scenarios). We need a way to easily distinguish those "easy important"
tickets and minimize the number of those, so that we can also address
them quickly.

Mojca