There's nearly zero cost to leaving a stale bug report open. A few kB, and maybe not even that because closed tickets are rarely actually deleted.
If you're not working on a bug, then, by definition, it's not taking up your time.
Some people are just obsessive about not wanting to look like they have open bugs on their project. But closing tickets and fixing bugs are not the same thing.
> There's nearly zero cost to leaving a stale bug report open.
Triaging an endless list is very costly.
I do agree with the idea that if you expect your project to be public (and not just something you did that you'll share if somebody wants) it is a cost you are expected to take. But it's wrong to pretend it's free.
Triage is what happens when you first look at a new ticket and decide what to do with it, any encounter/interaction after that is not a triage.
If maintainers feel like they need to close tickets only to keep order, than that's a problem with the tooling: tickets should only be closed if they're malformed, solved, or (arguably) wontfix.
I've always interpreted "triage" as the first response whenever something comes up (paralleling the medical term were it's from), is that not how it is?
If you're not working on a bug, then, by definition, it's not taking up your time.
Some people are just obsessive about not wanting to look like they have open bugs on their project. But closing tickets and fixing bugs are not the same thing.