Directing submitter to use upstream channels instead

[Christian Robottom Reis]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 03:31:08PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>  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'.

I don't really see a reason to close this bug in Ubuntu. It is still an
issue that affects the distribution, and the fact that /we/ won't work
on it doesn't mean that nobody else is welcome to.

I think it's okay to have bugs open on Ubuntu we won't put effort into.
Keeping the bugs around means people are less likely to file dupes, and
also, that volunteers are welcome to come in and help us with them.

Given that, I would suggest the following criteria in this situation:

    If you won't accept a fix for this bug in Ubuntu, then use the
    status "Rejected".

    If you would accept a fix, but won't put any effort into it, then
    leave the bug open, unassign it (set the assignee to nobody) and
    move on.

Using the assignee and milestone fields is a better way of deciding what
bugs need attention than observing the list of open bugs on a package.
Perhaps our bug listings could be made to deemphasize or segregate bugs
that were unassigned, or perhaps that should be a sorting option.
-- 
Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 3376 0125