Recently I asked the question about "Why do some close or reopen votes show in a timeline as invalidated instead of completed?", and part of a comment below the answer to it stated this:
... That one got invalidated because of a bug that existed back then (I believe it got fixed last year). Essentially any reopen vote causes the edit to be ignored, but the system only considered reopen votes at least 15 minutes old for review cases. So if the system updated review within that 15-minute, it would think the task is invalid because the edit doesn't qualify and the only reopen vote isn't old enough. It would kill the task and wouldn't recreate it unless a second reopen vote came in. I forget how it was fixed, I think we started ignoring the reopen vote time.
However, today I ran in yet another similar scenario, which is like so:
- Edit a question that had status "hold" (I have sufficient rep, no need for suggested edit review queue).
- Wait about 15 to 20 mins to have the question show up in the reopen review queue.
- Vote about the question in the reopen review queue (I have sufficient rep to perform such review), i.e. vote to
reopenthe question, and as the 1st reviewer.
- Wait a few minutes and check the timeline of the question, to then notice the reopen task got invalidated.
So it seems to me that something similar as what is mentioned in the quoted comment above has happened again. After I posted a comment below that same answer to my previous question, this is what animuson♦ added as extra comment:
@Pierre You might wanna file a bug report for the Reopen queue incorrectly invalidating tasks when a reopen vote comes in after an edit. – animuson♦
Hence my new question here, tagged as requested by animuson ...
Note: there is also this question (on meta.ell.SE), credits to gerry for the comment about that ... but the accepted answer there is, at least for me, NOT obvious to digest. While I think that, because of the nature of this question (it may probably happen on any site), the question belongs on meta.SE.
PS: I leave it to others to consider this as a bug or not (I tag it as a support question for now).