[bradwood]

> I think it's causing more harm than good to keep it unresolved on there.

Sorry, what? You have an open incident that you think should be shown as resolved as not doing so "causes more harm than good"?

Right, so lying to your customers about the state of an incident is better than just telling them the truth?

[dismantlethesun]

When you place a fix into production, often it's the case you hope it resolves all issues and doesn't create new ones.

However, you don't know if it resolved everything because you are only working with the symptoms given by one user.

If another user has similar but not the same problem, they won't post about it if the situation is still unresolved. They dont know their case is different, and isn't being worked on.

[bradwood]

> When you place a fix into production, often it's the case you hope it resolves all issues and doesn't create new ones.

I hope not. Relying on "hope" when fixing prod is not a recipe for success in my book. It should ideally be possible to recreate the problem in a lesser environment, or at least get a level of comfort that fix will work based more on fact than "hope" before applying it.

Even then, if you are relegated to the level of hope and prayer when trying to handle an incident, it still doesn't mean you should close it unless you are *certain* it's fixed.

You can mark it as mitigated or fix applied, monitoring for xx period before marking as resolved or similar, surely.

[dismantlethesun]

I wholly agree. From what I see OP also agrees since they will now be using a stricter criteria to enable them to close more incidents earlier and only reopen when it's proven that there are other issues.