[Bug 122954] [lagg] IPv6 EUI64 incorrectly chosen for lagg devices
Eugene Grosbein
eugen at grosbein.net
Sat Dec 9 21:28:07 UTC 2017
10.12.2017 4:03, Josh Paetzel wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017, at 02:29 PM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 10.12.2017 1:29, bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org wrote:
>>
>>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122954
>>>
>>> Josh Paetzel <jpaetzel at FreeBSD.org> changed:
>>>
>>> What |Removed |Added
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Status|In Progress |Closed
>>> CC| |jpaetzel at FreeBSD.org
>>> Resolution|--- |Overcome By Events
>>>
>>
>> One should not just close PRs without any descriptive commentary no
>> matter how old it is.
>> The same applies to
>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118727
>>
>> Please add some comments why did you closed them.
>>
>
> The bug tracking system is in poor shape right now due to an enormous
> backlog of bugs in it that will never get addressed.
>
> While I agree that it would be great to add comments to each bug I close
> if I closed even 100 bugs a day and no one added any new bugs it will be
> 4 months before I get just the kern category cleaned up. I do intend to
> start adding comments once I get to FreeBSD 8 era bugs. So there's
> hope.
>
> To be honest a bug that has had no activity in 10 years kinda speaks for
> itself. Maybe we can get the bugzilla maintainers to add a "closed
> because no one gave a f***" category to help people figure out what is
> going on. :)
>
> Thanks for your feedback.
Then why bother manually closing them? This looks like simple mechanical work.
<em>If</em> we have a consensus of this, just close such pre-8 era bugs with a script at once, eh?
But I personaly don't think this is right to blindly close old bug despite of period when nobody cared of it.
I have a load of my own PRs (and no time to work on some of them yet) that are pretty valid still,
f.e. bin/61355 (4.9-STABLE era) to start from.
More information about the freebsd-net
mailing list