Subject: RE: bug#10134: acknowledged by developer (close 10134) | [debbugs-tracker] Processed: close 10134

From: "Drew Adams" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:01:45 -0800

> >  The maintainer who closes a report should ensure, probably 
> > by sending a separate message, that the user who reported
> > the bug knows why it is being closed.
> 
> Which is exactly what happened, according to your comment:
> 
> > (Yes, I read the bug thread and I realize the bug has now 
> > been fixed.)

Uh, nope.

I wrote that in my message that pointed out that I received no message
explaining the closure.  I wrote it _after_ getting the automatic closure
message, looking up the bug number, and consulting the thread.  After all that,
yes, I realized that bug #10134 was one that had been fixed.

The point of the guideline is for the closer to ensure that the filer knows why
it is being closed before closing.  The point of sending a separate message is
to let the filer connect the reason/status with the bug number, without having
to traipse through the thread again.

The last message in the thread, before the automatic closure message, was
2011/12/25, over a month and a half ago.  Had the no-reason automatic message
come on that day or, say, Dec 26th, things might have been a bit different in
terms of my awareness of this bug and its status.

Between just 2012/01/01 and today there have been 280 messages for Emacs bugs I
filed.  Perhaps you can understand that a message letting me know that this bug
was fixed would have been helpful.

And as I said, in the case where a bug is fixed, that info alone is sometimes
sufficient for the filer, so perhaps the automatic closure message could include
that info.