On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 19:29 +0000, Curtis Hovey wrote:
> I think Tom and Barry need to discuss this.
Sounds like a good idea. After the rollout I'll try and make a point to
follow up
> I am threatening to drop
> this because this really cannot be a High bug if it is not important
> enough for the two interested parties to close.
>
> I'm certain that any bug that has been high for more than three months
> is not really high. I suspect that the reason is because bug that were
> high took all the attention from the interested parties.
I suspect it's because this bug doesn't affect us very often (i.e. only
when mailman is restarted under certain conditions), but is very painful
when it does.
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 19:29 +0000, Curtis Hovey wrote:
> I think Tom and Barry need to discuss this.
Sounds like a good idea. After the rollout I'll try and make a point to
follow up
> I am threatening to drop
> this because this really cannot be a High bug if it is not important
> enough for the two interested parties to close.
>
> I'm certain that any bug that has been high for more than three months
> is not really high. I suspect that the reason is because bug that were
> high took all the attention from the interested parties.
I suspect it's because this bug doesn't affect us very often (i.e. only
when mailman is restarted under certain conditions), but is very painful
when it does.