I have noticed that the user dino99 is currently very active in invalidating bugs which were submitted based on observations in an Ubuntu version which is now EOL. This may be right sometimes, but some bugs are not tied to a particular version, and hence should not be closed for that reason. This is an example where I re-opened the bug report:
Not sure how to deal with the problem. I subscribed the guy to that bug report before re-opening it, but no response, and then notifications in my inbox about a couple of other bugs which he invalidated.
Yeah … happened to me too. Same with some guy named “Chris Penalver” or some-such, mass-closing bugs in the past. I think that there is a push to close old or perhaps nonrelevent bugs that were tied to EOL versions. It is inconvenient, yet — if reopening the bugs(copy/paste relevant data) gets these old issues some fresh attention, then … might be worth it. Just don’t ‘apport-bug’ it to a specific release version, if you can.
In #ubuntu-bugs I think we concluded that it’s probably reasonable to send a polite message to this person in the first instance. There’s a “Contact this user” link on the Launchpad page. Can someone volunteer to do this please? Perhaps relay the link to this post.
Ok, I sent a message - without a link to this post, which might have offended him.
Polite? Judge for yourself; this is what I wrote:
I’ve noticed that you have closed quite a few bugs which affect EOL Ubuntu versions. Thanks a lot for your work with that!
However, please note that even if a bug reporter used a specific Ubuntu version when reporting an issue, the issue is not necessarily specific to that version. And if not, the bug should not be closed solely due to that version reaching EOL.
So please be more attentive in this respect. If you don’t know that the issue has been fixed in later versions, at least subscribe to the bug report so you see if the bug reporter or someone else has something to say.
Personally I think there is a nicer way to handle some of those bugs: In the comment you can ask if the issue is still present in the latest Ubuntu version, and mark it as “incomplete” instead of “invalid”. That way, if nobody reacts, the bug will be automatically closed later on.
I think it’s still reasonable to assume good faith. Perhaps this Launchpad account is associated with an email address that is old and no longer read, for example.
I’m not sure what to propose next. Perhaps it’s appropriate to ask the Launchpad admins to disable the account on the basis that the email address associated with it appears invalid, this person’s actions are causing damage and we have been unable to make contact. Then, whether this person reactivates the account or creates a new one, we might at least have a way of making contact that works.
I know the user is a member of the forum - I tried messaging them there, but they’ve set up to not receive messages from people.
If people have tried to contact them - but they’re making themselves impossible to contact then I would suppose as rbasak says - CC would be the next logical step and hope they can do so - if not then no real recourse other than LP admins.
As an aside I see a lot of bugs being invalidated due to Xubuntu Team membership - iirc we tried leaving messages asking them not to in the past to no avail. However, that could possibly have been another user, memory is not what it once was I’m afraid.
If you want me to move this to the CC section - let me know and I’ll do so as soon as I see that.
Christopher got me a long way with triaging a kernel bug I had with my PackardBell desktop a while back. I like his commitment to the cause and he clearly had good intentions…
Is there some wiki documentation on cleaning old bugs? It’s not necessary but if people want to do it and thus make bug lists more readable and manageable then really there should be good instruction written somewhere!
@flocculant, I seem to recall he was somewhat active in the Ubuntu GNOME community in the early days, but seems he has posting this crap for 4 years now. probably just to get karma. If all reasonable attempts have been made to contact him, I think this should be referred to the CC.