Massive bug expiration spree

[Caroline Ford]

All the duplicates have also sent out a spam mail.

Caroline
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 21:11 -0700, Jordan Mantha wrote:
> On 9/21/07, Mario Limonciello <superm1 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'm not too sure I agree with this massive expiration on the bug
> > reports.  Just because there was no activity for 60 days doesn't make
> > the bug invalid.  Lots of people have very large queues, and won't be
> > getting to it for a while.  The bugs still do exist and this is making
> > it appear as though they are insignificant or unnecessary.
> 
> Note that the bugs have to be inactive for 60 days *and* in the
> Incomplete state. If we're just waiting for info from the reporter or
> something that leaves it incomplete then 60 days without activity
> seems reasonable.
> 
> The issue I see with this change is that people (including myself)
> probably aren't using the Incomplete status properly. Perhaps we want
> to move a Incomplete to Confirmed if we want to keep it around but
> don't have enough info to get it to Triaged. LP devs, is this the
> correct bug flow?
> 
> -Jordan
> 
> -Jordan
>