1 |
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 02:49, Duncan wrote: |
2 |
> Mike Frysinger posted on Sat, 24 Sep 2011 01:10:43 -0400 as excerpted: |
3 |
>> it was purely to keep people from continuing to whine with circular |
4 |
>> logic. if bugzilla had a way to temporarily lock comments, i would |
5 |
>> have used that. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> In theory, that'd be a useful feature. In fact, probably not so much, as |
8 |
> it simply encourages people to complain much more visibly, very possibly |
9 |
> in a PR-adverse way. |
10 |
|
11 |
i couldn't care less. if people are swayed by random rants rather |
12 |
than reality, then i'm not going to waste time on them. |
13 |
|
14 |
> You could see it was circular logic, but what if he had blogged about it |
15 |
> and that blog had hit the FLOSS media circuit? How many FLOSS reporters |
16 |
> would have seen that it was circular logic based on his blog and a locked |
17 |
> (comment or visibility) bug? What about all their readers? |
18 |
|
19 |
clearly you don't know my opinion of blogs in general. |
20 |
|
21 |
> Additionally, that bug was referenced in a number of changelog entries. |
22 |
> How useful is a link to a locked bug, for those looking for more info, as |
23 |
> I, for instance did (as I often do with -rX bumps, since information |
24 |
> that's significant enough to cause a gentoo revision bump in the absence |
25 |
> of an upstream version bump is often significant enough for me as an |
26 |
> admin to want to be aware of)? |
27 |
|
28 |
then you'd simply wait until it got unlocked. or ask a dev. |
29 |
|
30 |
> Unfortunately, locking a bug to kill the whining is likely to have rather |
31 |
> more negative effects than one might have anticipated. One would think |
32 |
> comment locking would be a logical enough extension to have been |
33 |
> implemented by now; perhaps this is why it hasn't been. (Full visibility |
34 |
> locking is of course different, security bugs and all.) |
35 |
|
36 |
i don't see any negative effects so far. |
37 |
-mike |