Hi, I've seen a lot of [status-bydesign] tags here, but when I read the question it appears that they are unfixable bugs.

Some of these features have obviously not been designed, just following badly written third party API's etc.

I propose that a different tag such as [wont-fix] or [unable-tofix] should be used in conjunction with the [status-bydesign] tag.

To be honest it comes across badly to see status by design when its obviously not by design. Won't fix though more direct feels more honest.


EDIT: What are other peoples feeling on this? Could a discussion be held?

EDIT 2: To try to better explain my position. Won't Fix is a standard resolution in most bug tracking systems I use.

By design implies just that. That there's no problem move along. I'm not saying every status-bydesign should be a won't fix but there are certainly a number of them, which are recognised as minor problems. The existing tag used to close these implies that there is no problem

SEE Links choosing sort order in 'favorites' tab of one's own user page have & in URL and don't work for "open in new tab"

Not correctly closing the <sub> tag renders "correctly" in the preview zone but not in the actual text

Getting "can only post questions every 20 minutes" but did not post recently

as examples.

  • 7
    This'll probably be closed as status-bydesign. – Andrew Grimm Nov 26 '10 at 10:04
  • Yes I'm actually aware of that. It's a bit ironic. However its actually the valid closing tag on this. – Wes Nov 26 '10 at 11:42
  • This isn't Meta Stack Overflow for nothing ;) – Mike Caron Nov 26 '10 at 16:30
  • @Mike Caron I don't know what you mean sorry. – Wes Nov 26 '10 at 16:46
  • 1
    You're discussing the use of [status-bydesign] on Meta SO threads, in a Meta SO thread, expecting it to be closed with [status-bydesign]. That's pretty much the text-book definiton of meta. – Mike Caron Nov 26 '10 at 16:56
  • I cannot see any reason why that additional information should be a tag. – Tsuyoshi Ito Nov 26 '10 at 18:14
  • 1
    Would status-dont-give-a-crap be more descriptive? ;) – gnostradamus Nov 26 '10 at 19:47
  • 1
    @gnostradamus I think that that tag should be saved for use on questions pertaining to syntax highlighting of non-C derived languages. – aaronasterling Nov 26 '10 at 21:53
  • This is still being voted on. I thought it was resolved. Does that mean people do want to see it? – Wes Nov 28 '10 at 15:52

will be used in the case you describe, when we are declining to "fix" this bug.

is used when the behavior is more or less as intended, either by the world or us.

| improve this answer | |
  • I don't know why I haven't seen that before. I know I've seen specific examples in the past. Declined is fine with me. – Wes Nov 27 '10 at 14:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .