Re: The impending end of FC2 NEEDINFO bugs...

[Tom Lane <tgl redhat com>]

"Mike A. Harris" <mharris www linux org uk> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there a reason not to leave such bugs in NEEDINFO state forever?

> Yes.  Then there are 100000 bugs open forever, that will never
> be addressed.

Fair enough.  What about adding a resolution category "closed for lack
of information", which we could use if something stays in NEEDINFO
too long?  Or I suppose we could use WORKSFORME ...

			regards, tom lane