Directing submitter to use upstream channels instead

[Ian Jackson]

Sometimes I have this situation:

I want to close a bug report against Ubuntu, despite the fact that I
agree that the report describes is a defect in the system, because I
don't think that Ubuntu is the appropriate forum for resolving it.
This might be because there are design issues involved, or more
substantial implementation effort would be needed, so that we don't
have the resources to fix it.

Sometimes the issue seems worth my effort reporting the bug upstream
myself.  This typically involves a relatively thorough search of the
upstream bug system, and a redaction, rewording and restatement of the
report; it also puts me in the contact loop for future updates from
upstream.

Other times I would prefer not to (perhaps it seems very likely to me
that the issue is already known about upstream, or that it is a matter
of opinion and the original submitter is better placed to advocate for
their favoured solution, or the issue is too unimportant compared to
the amount of effort required).

In these cases in the Debian BTS I would normally close the bug with
an explanation to the submitter.  In Bugzilla I would explain my
position and set the status to NOTFORUS.  What should I do in Malone ?

I asked this question on #launchpad and it was suggested that for now
I should use `rejected', but I was asked to raise the issue here so
that we can discuss it more generally.

IMO `rejected' is wrong because it implies that the original report is
somehow defective.  It is a (relatively mild) implied criticism of the
submitter's decision to file the bug in the first place.  Sometimes
this is appropriate, and that's when `rejected' is right.  `Rejected'
to me means `this should not have been filed in the first place and
the submitter should have known that', and rejecting a bug in this way
(with a polite explanation) is part of the process of educating the
community.

However in this case the situation is quite different.  The bug report
is quite true and appropriate, and no criticism of the submitter is
implied by my decision to spend our limited effort elsewhere.  It
would be nice to be able to close a report (strictly, in LP-speak, a
task) with something along the lines of `we agree that this would be
nice but we are not going to spend any effort on it in the context of
Ubuntu'.

Ian.