Old bugs

[Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d]

On 10/14/16 4:18 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 10/14/2016 07:17 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 10/14/2016 05:12 AM, Mathias Lang via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>> I've been doing a bit of triaging when I got time, trying to get rid of
>>> old bugs / duplicated.
>>>
>>> It's usually easy to confirm a bug if there's a minimal code example, in
>>> which case you can just close it. The enhancement requests, however,
>>> nobody but a bunch of people in the core team can get rid of them,
>>> because they require a decision to be made. So unless there was a
>>> discussion where you or Walter agreed on it (like for deprecating comma
>>> operator or implicit string concatenation), they just sit there forever.
>>>
>>> Eventually, with the new DIP process, we could gradually get rid of them
>>> by pointing the author to the DIP repo, then let him/her close the bug
>>> as he ACK the notification, or do it after a certain time. What do you
>>> think ?
>>
>> Yes, I've already closed a few enhancement requests (such as overhauling
>> the syntax of templates) suggesting they are pursued as DIPs. I'll do
>> more of that in the future, for now I'm focused on bootcamping select
>> issues. If you could lend a hand, please to! -- Andrei
>
> s/please to/please do/

Taking a pass through the whole db is a worthy thing to do, but to reduce the enormous time cost of 
that, focusing on the regression-major set (ie, saving normal and below) would 'only' be 500ish bugs 
that have a reasonable urgency to them.