From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <insight-announce-return-7-listarch-insight-announce=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 26594 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2008 15:31:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 30422 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Feb 2008 14:34:46 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=rITDv7nW5hcA:10 a=_4OlVG1CqrxA7Ht7izIA:9
 a=GlriGRJW_o8f5nJaIL0A:7 a=iRN74glV8pUWCfVFDCzZze_1h88A:4 a=jEp0ucaQiEUA:10
 a=4t78-hnhQh4A:10 a=plE8mkVoi54A:10
Message-ID: <000401c87496$d052c1a0$6501a8c0@DadsDell>
Reply-To: "terptom" <terptom@comcast.net>
From: "terptom" <terptom@comcast.net>
To: <insight-announce@sourceware.org>
References: <47BCD137.3020806@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Bug database cleaning
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:31:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
Mailing-List: contact insight-announce-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <insight-announce.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:insight-announce-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/insight-announce/>
List-Post: <mailto:insight-announce@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insight-announce-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: insight-announce-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Seitz" <keiths@redhat.com>
To: <insight-announce@sourceware.org>; "insight" <insight@sourceware.org>
{snip}
>I just seldom use the bug database
{snip}
> the bug database is quite a bit larger than it should be. 
{snip}

Could those two things *possibly* be related???

 >I would like to close all bugs older than approximately one year. 
{snip}
>Any one have any objections to this?

Yes.

People are much less likely to put in a 'fresh' bug report if an entry is already in the bug-base.

Q:  "When is a problem not a problem?"

A: "When I ignore it for more than a year."

Bugs die of lonliness when left uncorrected?

Please consider each case on its technical merits, not longevity.

Else, one or more of us could while away a pleasant evening 'refreshing' all entries with accession numbers <306...

Does that make sense?