Rename Postponed (maintainers needs more info) to something not coupled with maintainers

Before it was just needs more info, people would post new issues with this status because the poster felt like they needed more information. Without knowing what they were doing, they were filing issues into a trashcan nobody would see, because the status is meant to mean that the poster (or people with the same problem as the poster) need to provide more information. So I'm not sure I disagree that the status is wrong. What the status means is that whoever is working on the project needs more information to act on it, and it has to be clear that it the status means the issue is blocked and needs information from the poster or people experiencing the problem.

I'm glad this is being looked at. If I carefully attempt to reproduce the steps on an active issue and the end result is that more info is needed, how do I flag that as a non-maintainer? Here's an example from just this morning. Since I haven't changed the status, who's to know (besides the OP and others who have reported in) that it has been dealt with at all? Not saying it's a huge problem - an astute maintainer will spot these things eventually - but certainly something could be done to grease the wheels a bit there.

Regarding the old problem of posters misunderstanding "needs more info", do you think it would make a difference to replace "info" with "detail"? Or something like "more detailed report required"? Not sure about it myself, but it's easier to see a poster feeling they want information to help them solve their problem, but not so much details. If that makes sense? :P

"Postponed (more info needed from user)" is great except it leaves out others who have reported on the same problem. Not sure how much that matters. I was thinking about "community" instead of "user" but that might unintentionally absolve the original poster from seeing the issue through.

Sticky!

Whatever name is used, it needs to mean something like: Postponed (cannot be worked on without more information) (which in itself is too long).

Also, changing 'info' to 'detail' will probably not change the basic understanding. The difference between "I need more info" and "I need more detail" is pretty small when the real problem was that the old way didn't tell us *who* needed more information and *who* needed to act to unblock the issue.

Ultimately the problem that needs to be addressed here is how to get users to understand if they're problem reporters or problem solvers. It doesn't just need to be maintainers to solve problems, but we don't really have a word to describe people who are solving problems but are not maintainers.

Just a thought: If people were postponing their own issues, the problem may not be the wording *after* "Postponed". Was it possibly a language barrier issue? Slipping the word "maintainer" in there would certainly stop them in their tracks, but unfortunately everyone else, too.

Possible, too, that "need more info" was just too much of a trigger - as in, I'm stuck and I NEEEEEED info HAALP !! The "Postponed" part was just being ignored.

That said, "Postponed (pending more info)" fits with @merlinofchaos' criteria but perhaps less trigger-ish than what was before. Dunno, maybe?

How about "Awaiting for more information"

"Postponed (awaiting more information)" seems good. Or "Postponed (awaiting more information from reporter)"?

Related issues #1230642: Automatically mark "postponed (maintainer needs more info)" issues to "closed (cannot reproduce)" and #156704: Dealing with "postponed (maintainer needs more info)" issues.