Re: How to treat duplicates
On Monday, August 29, 2005 at 6:41:26 PM +0200, Rado Smiljanic wrote:
> [=- Alain Bench wrote on Sun 28.Aug'05 at 0:10:43 +0200 -=]
>> I like more your crossref #nnn in keywords way.
> I use(d) that for reports which were related, not identical.
Well, the Debbugs merge could cover both identical and related
cases. Hum... At least I used merging like that. And IIRC there was only
one case where I was later forced to unmerge a bug that revealed
different (#844 unmerged from #977/#1072, then fixed separately).
> [=- Paul Walker wrote on Sun 28.Aug'05 at 10:54:54 +0100 -=]
>> Close all but the first, updating the first to add a ref to each
>> duplicate.
> transferring the reporters to the notification list
Yes, that's important. Hum... What about:
Keep all open, mark duplicate all but first, add crossrefs, and
cross notifieds.
Well, a little bit overcomplicated, and we have much too many open
bugs already. Let's do it with your closing method. At least until the
bug list is more reasonable.
Bye! Alain.
--
« if you believe the Content-Length header, I've got a bridge to sell you. »