As a middle ground, sometimes a good repro that uses what anyone can easily get helps.
At least, that’s what I’ve been encouraging people to do if they file an issue on Duplicati…
Regarding oblivion, you might notice I’ve been working down the better-defined issues list.
There’s then the question of how heavily to work, close, or keep-for-reference vague ones.
That’s most definitely NOT what I mean by a bug report that is just saying ‘it does not work’. A good repro should absolutely never go to oblivion.
I have noticed. Project insights are there for a reason. Thanks for doing that. I am also chipping away at the mountain from time to time.
vague ones ? Pretty heavily IMO. Noise is harmful. There is a way: ask for information. If people don’t care and/or have moved on, why should we keep this useless weight ?
but you left the “good repro” part in the middle undefined. I guess “where the problem occurs” could be read as “where in the code” or “where in the steps”. I took it as code level, but maybe you meant steps. Giving both is the best possible – give the steps to repro, then say how this leads to the failure in code.
Regardless, we seem to be in agreement, although I’m not sure which level we can hit on this problem.
)