To be fair, this has only relatively recently been decided, and if there's consensus on an even better process, nothing should stop it from being adopted. There's also inconsistency: have all the WONTFIXed ones been corrected to "FIXED (Fremantle)" yet?

Having said that, some reaons why leaving it left open isn't really very viable with the tools:

• It's not easy to see which requests have been dealt with, and which are newly opened.
• It's slightly unrealistic: in the current climate no-one but Nokia really are going to provide these fixes to earlier OSes, especially if the Fremantle fix is to rearchitect a portion of the system to make meeting the requirement easier.

Perhaps a modification of the "target" milestone would help. Ideally, of course, the issue would be assigned to the appropriate designer/developer/reviewer/architect to act as a master for the development. It would then be updated with specs and assigned through the development workflow, finally being FIXED when the code is committed to some repository somewhere (hopefully a publicly visible one).

Failing that, what about keeping them open and assigned to "fremantle@maemo.bugs", again until some (internal) build of the software meets the requirement as outlined.