| 1 |
On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 23:46 -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>>This brings up a point that really irks me. In the bug, I believe the dev |
| 7 |
> >>>implies that the reported bug has merit /yet he closes the bug before |
| 8 |
> >>>actually doing something about it/. And I don't mean to pick on Jeffrey; |
| 9 |
> >>>this seems to be a common habit among Gentoo devs. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> >>Also note that the bug is NOT "closed", only /resolved/. There /is/ a |
| 12 |
> >>not insignificant technical difference, altho it /does/ seem Gentoo |
| 13 |
> >>doesn't seem to actually close bugs that often. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Ah, my bad. For some reason I thought it had been closed. But I know |
| 16 |
> that if you looked (not too hard) you could find bugs that were closed |
| 17 |
> by the person assigned to resolve it and/or that were closed before the |
| 18 |
> 'fix' was marked stable. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > thats because very few (if any) think or care about the difference |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> You could make bugzilla try to enforce the process; that would get dev's |
| 24 |
> thinking and caring! Just think: The Great QA Rebellion of 2005 ;) |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Problem is many of us have sometimes already too many bugs to care about |
| 28 |
users reporting something, and then never coming back, not even talking |
| 29 |
about keeping to poke the reporter to come back and say the fix works |
| 30 |
fine, and close it. Thus the fix it, test it, resolve the bug as Fixed, |
| 31 |
and if the user do not reopen it, your work is done. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 36 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 37 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives