Please Congratulate My New Assistant

[Imperatorn]

On Sunday, 24 January 2021 at 13:00:41 UTC, Max Haughton wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 January 2021 at 12:36:16 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 18.01.21 10:21, Mike Parker wrote:
>>> Thanks once more to Symmetry Investments, we have a new paid 
>>> staffer in the D Language Foundation family.
>>> 
>>> Though I call him my "assistant", I can already see he will 
>>> be more than that. He'll be taking some things off my 
>>> shoulders, sure, but he also has ideas of his own to bring 
>>> into the mix. Adding him to the team is certain to be a boon 
>>> for the D community.
>>> 
>>> So, a word of warning to those of you who haven't heard from 
>>> me in a while pestering you for blog posts: get used to the 
>>> name "Max Haughton".
>>> 
>>> And congratulate him while you're at it!
>>
>> Congratulations. However, Max seems to be just closing all 
>> enhancement requests on bugzilla as invalid. This is the 
>> behavior of a vandal. Please stop. Any policy that requires 
>> this is ill-advised. Issues are valuable and binning them like 
>> this is disrespectful to the time of the reporters.
>
> I was going through trying to close things that are either not 
> bugs anymore because they haven't been touched from 2010 and 
> they've been fixed by entropy, or language changes which will 
> never be looked at again because they aren't DIPs. They're 
> still in public record but fundamentally they're just not 
> useful anymore - I was literally just going through bugs FILO 
> and trying to either reproduce or at least characterise whether 
> they even can be acted on by the foundation.
>
> It's entirely possible I was overzealous and if I was, 
> obviously reopen them but ultimately the enhancements have to 
> go through a DIP because it's not 2012 anymore.
>
> I also updated Stephen S's shared-delegate race condition bug 
> to have a test case that actually compiles, and that's from 
> 2010 - theadsan catches it now although it doesn't work with 
> @safe either so I'm not sure whether we should be embarrassed 
> or not.

Imo it's reasonable to close or archive issues that are older 
than 10 years.
#controversial

Reason:
If it has been almost a hundred releases since the issue was 
created, the probability of it even being reproducible is quite 
small, and the quality of the fix might be reduced.

While I do agree that "an issue is an issue regardless of time" 
it's a bit misleading when you get down to the details. I think 
you know what I mean.

Take a moment and think about every single change that has 
happened since 2010:

2.095.0 (Jan 01, 2021)
2.094.2 (Nov 20, 2020)
2.094.1 (Oct 18, 2020)
2.094.0 (Sep 22, 2020)
2.093.1 (Aug 15, 2020)
2.093.0 (Jul 07, 2020)
2.092.1 (Jun 10, 2020)
2.092.0 (May 10, 2020)
2.091.1 (Apr 17, 2020)
2.091.0 (Mar 08, 2020)
2.090.1 (Feb 06, 2020)
2.090.0 (Jan 05, 2020)
2.089.1 (Dec 14, 2019)
2.089.0 (Nov 02, 2019)
2.088.1 (Oct 11, 2019)
2.088.0 (Sep 01, 2019)
2.087.1 (Aug 04, 2019)
2.087.0 (Jul 01, 2019)
2.086.1 (Jun 15, 2019)
2.086.0 (May 04, 2019)
2.085.1 (Apr 05, 2019)
2.085.0 (Mar 01, 2019)
2.084.1 (Feb 09, 2019)
2.084.0 (Jan 01, 2019)
2.083.1 (Dec 08, 2018)
2.083.0 (Nov 01, 2018)
2.082.1 (Oct 10, 2018)
2.082.0 (Sep 01, 2018)
2.081.2 (Aug 12, 2018)
2.081.1 (Jul 10, 2018)
2.081.0 (Jul 01, 2018)
2.080.1 (Jun 07, 2018)
2.080.0 (May 01, 2018)
2.079.1 (Apr 14, 2018)
2.079.0 (Mar 01, 2018)
2.078.3 (Feb 15, 2018)
2.078.2 (Feb 07, 2018)
2.078.1 (Jan 21, 2018)
2.078.0 (Jan 01, 2018)
2.077.1 (Nov 29, 2017)
2.077.0 (Nov 1, 2017)
2.076.1 (Oct 09, 2017)
2.076.0 (Sep 1, 2017)
2.075.1 (Aug 11, 2017)
2.075.0 (Jul 19, 2017)
2.074.1 (May 30, 2017)
2.074.0 (Apr 10, 2017)
2.073.2 (Mar 09, 2017)
2.073.1 (Feb 16, 2017)
2.073.0 (Jan 22, 2017)
2.072.2 (Dec 31, 2016)
2.072.1 (Nov 30, 2016)
2.072.0 (Oct 30, 2016)
2.071.2 (September 19, 2016)
2.071.1 (June 27, 2016)
2.071.0 (Apr 5, 2016)
2.070.2 (Mar 3, 2016)
2.070.1 (Feb 27, 2016)
2.070.0 (Jan 27, 2016)
2.069.2 (Dec 3, 2015)
2.069.1 (Nov 11, 2015)
2.069.0 (Nov 3, 2015)
2.068.2 (Sep 23, 2015)
2.068.1 (Sep 06, 2015)
2.068.0 (Aug 09, 2015)
2.067.1 (Apr 25, 2015)
2.067.0 (Mar 24, 2015)
2.066.1 (October 15, 2014)
2.066.0 (August 18, 2014)
2.065.0 (February 24, 2014)
2.064 (November 5, 2013)
2.063 (May 28, 2013)
2.062 (Feb 18, 2013)
2.061 (Jan 1, 2013)
2.060 (Aug 2, 2012)
2.059 (Apr 12, 2012)
2.058 (Feb 14, 2012)
2.057 (Dec 13, 2011)
2.056 (Oct 26, 2011)
2.055 (Sep 4, 2011)
2.054 (Jul 10, 2011)
2.053 (May 12, 2011)
2.052 (Feb 17, 2011)
2.051 (Dec 21, 2010)
2.050 (Oct 29, 2010)
2.049 (Sep 13, 2010)
2.048 (Aug 8, 2010)
2.047 (Jun 11, 2010)
2.046 (May 10, 2010)
2.045 (May 4, 2010)
2.044 (Apr 30, 2010)
2.043 (Apr 6, 2010)
2.042 (Mar 19, 2010)
2.041 (Mar 7, 2010)
2.040 (Jan 29, 2010)
2.039 (Jan 1, 2010)

Keep this changelog in your mind while you try the fix the bug.

Proposed solution:
Archive issues older than 10 years (and maybe some critera based 
on latest updated). If they are relevant, it's the authors 
responsibility to update the issue so that it's reproducible in 
the latest release.
#reasonablebutcontroversial

We are only a certain number of people being able to fix issues, 
we have to be realistic.

Critical / high impact bugs should be fixed first, otherwise they 
are not critical neither high impact, and should be reclassified.

#peace