Stop bugzilla bot from marking issues as "RESOLVED ARCHIVED".

Augie Fackler raf at
Fri Mar 1 15:06:53 EST 2019

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 1:44 PM Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc at> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 3:15 AM Josef 'Jeff' Sipek <jeffpc at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 21:33:31 -0500, Augie Fackler wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 03:31:11AM +0530, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>> ...
>> > > practice was a good idea, anyway?
>> >
>> > Without the bot, the bug backlog grows without bound. Nobody actually
>> > checks to see if old bugs are fixed, and eventually the bugtracker
>> > becomes a disaster and not useful.
>> I have to say that at the beginning of this thread, I 100% agreed with
>> Faheem but you managed to change my mind.
>> I think that it'd be a *huge* improvement if the message the bot used to
>> archive the bugs included "kinder" words.  That is, explain to whoever filed
>> the bug why the bug was closed and that reopening it is ok.  The current
>> message certainly evokes a "why did I even bother?" feeling which only
>> discourages reporting of new issues - and some of those issues are probably
>> serious bugs and not just minor nits.
> I feel that there are 2 themes to this thread. Both are valid.
> 1. The behavior/messaging of automatic bug closing could be a lot... kinder.
> 2. Our bug triage process isn't robust.
> At a minimum, we should change the comment when issues are marked RESOLVED ARCHIVED to be more user friendly. If we have the ability to further tailor the message to first-time bug filers, all the better.
> Can we get the bot's source code published and the contribution process documented so people can scratch this itch? I /think/ I have access to the infra repositories. If someone tells me where the source is, I could potentially do some lifting here.

I'm not sure. If you have time, try grepping around the infra repo? I
have no idea how it works, and haven't looked (and I'm out in my wood
shop today, so won't be likely to spend time on this until next week
at the soonest.)

> As for adopting a better bug triage process, we're in the same lacking boat as many other software projects :/ This requires ongoing commitment, which is difficult for an OSS project without full-time staffing. Perhaps we should be talking about ways to hold ourselves accountable. For example, we could make it part of the release process that we don't release unless we've triaged all bugs filed during that release window.
> Bug triage is a complex topic though. We might want to split that into a separate thread if we want to have that conversation...

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list