I don't want to be evil. I don't want to do things that are evil. However, I don't understand what you envision should happen as an alternative to what happened with this ticket. With this ticket:
- m f reported a problem and provided a stack trace which showed the problem
- I investigated the problem, was unable to reproduce the problem, and provided several ideas of conditions that might cause that type of problem
- I asked some further clarifying questions but received no responses to those clarifying questions
- Tian Wang reported a different problem which included a different error message inside a stack trace
- I asked Tian Wangto submit a different bug report so that independent issues have distinct bug reports,
- Tian Wang agreed that it was a separate bug report
- A month after receiving no answers from m f on the original questions, I closed the bug because I could not reproduce it
The Jenkins project Jira has "Cannot reproduce" as an allowed resolution of an issue. It is used by core and many different plugins. It allows those who attempt to verify a bug to explain to the submitter that they were unable to duplicate the bug. Resolving an issue as "Cannot reproduce" does not hide the issue. It does not prevent the issue from being reopened. It does not prevent someone from reopening it and assigning it to themselves to resolve. If I don't close an issue I cannot reproduce, then as a maintainer I must regularly filter the issues that I cannot reproduce by some other means. If I don't close an issue that I cannot reproduce, then I need to use another way of communicating to others that I could not reproduce the bug. Can you explain further what you think should have happened in this case and how those different steps would have been better? |