Ok - then let me ask you: what's the point of having a bugtracker full of bugs that are not going to be resolved?
I agree that we want people to file bugs - but they only do so when there is a chance the bug gets fixed (or at least a conclusive decision is made as to what to do with the bug) within a reasonable amount of time. Otherwise they file a bug, only to never do it again.
It's a balancing act between quality and quantity - and my opinion is that we're on the way to let the scale tip over in the direction of quantity. And that's my main point. Let put more focus on quality and less on quantity.
Therefor I essentially propose an explicit three-level system of:
1) oacs the toolkit
2) maintained packages
3) unmaintained packages
as opposed to the current two-level system (toolkit/pkgs)
If we allow filing bugs for level 3 it's fine with me - as long as we make painstakingly clear that one should not have the expectation of anything happening soon - unless they do it themselves.
But I'd rather see that we disallow it and use it as an incentive to get people to become pkg maintainer. If there's currently no maintainer, apperently nobody cared enough for the pkg. If you care for it ...
