Subject: Re: bug#14192: 24.3.50; recursive edit while running ispell not working usefully

From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 00:14:56 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:

> He said "if I don't hear from you".  If there's no answer and no new
> information, leaving bugs open just accumulates bugs that are not (and
> cannot be) worked on.

The "cannot be" part is not true in this case.  I provided an easy
recipe, the problem is reproducible in a few seconds.

> So we made a decision to close such bugs.  If the issue still exists
> and affects someone, those persons will probably report it at some
> point with enough information to allow investigating and fixing the
> problem.

And I provided a lot of information, and even an analysis.

> I don't see anything wrong with this policy.

This policy is good, but not appropriate in this case.

> We do know from bitter experience the downsides of not closing such
> bugs -- gobs of open bugs that no one looks at.  That is worse,
> IMNSHO.

That's a big problem, I know about it.  I remember Lars' statistics.

However the other side is also important.  I remember a discussion a
year or so ago, when somebody mentioned something is not working, and a
few people added that it doesn't work for them as well.  Then you
wondered why nobody had created a bug report..

It is important to give the people reporting bugs a good feeling.  The
feedback they get after such a long time should not sound that negative.
Ignored a report for such a long time is not nice, and even if it's not
our fault, we could say that we are sorry about that.  Choosing a more
positive will also raise the chance of a reply.  If this is a standard
text, it might be worth the time to improve it.

Michael.