Is cleaning up old issues worthwhile?

[Jacques Carette]

In my time working on an old system, I found the statement "they are so 
old that if the bug still exists there is probably a newer ticket" to be 
false multiple times.  Large systems hide many obscure bugs, some of 
which are rarely encountered. And sometimes the oldest symptom is the 
clearest one. I have always found that more tests is best; so even when 
I closed old bugs as 'magically fixed' in Maple, I still created a 
regression test for it.

Jacques

On 2019-05-04 5:56 p.m., Matthew Pickering wrote:
> I'm not sure the benefit of marking these tickets obsolete is. You may
> as well just close them. Someone can reopen them if they disagree.
>
> There could be some arguent for adding tests from these old tickets
> but tbh they are so old that if the bug still exists there is probably
> a newer ticket.
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 10:31 PM Kevin Buhr <buhr at asaurus.net> wrote:
>> Okay, I've added a new "obsolete" label:  "Old issues that no longer
>> apply and are in a short waiting period before closing."  I'll start
>> going through the low-hanging fruit adding comments and sticking this
>> label on them, with the idea of going back and closing them after, say,
>> 4 weeks with no complaints.  After I've gone through a few of these and
>> gained some experience with it, I'll try to draft some guidelines for
>> handling old tickets.
>>
>> Anyway, please let me know if this process starts to get irritating.
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Buhr <buhr at asaurus.net>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs at haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs