http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26630
--- Comment #12 from Jerome Leclanche adys.wh@gmail.com 2012-03-05 04:18:10 CST --- (In reply to comment #11) As a user, it sucks being told "your bug is invalid" when it, in fact, is not. Especially when it's serious stuff eg Xorg crashes, black screens, or even reboots.
Upstream at least means "We're taking care of it" somehow.
Mark a bug as invalid out of the blue and the reporter will likely get offended. I know you don't care but that means they won't file squat; which means either the bug won't get fixed (bad on *all* the users), or the bugzilla janitors have to take care of that. Turns out, if you're nice with them, they *will* follow the bug through and do whatever you ask them in order to get it fixed. Now I may just be a wine bugzilla janitor, but I still want to see non-wine bugs triggered by wine fixed.
And no, it's not a maintenance burden. I already make sure users report bugs upstream and add it to the See Also URL. Resolving it UPSTREAM is just hitting a different option on the dropdown.
I propose RESOLVED UPSTREAM once the bug is filed, and CLOSED UPSTREAM once it's closed upstream for whatever reason. Thoughts?