| 1 |
On Thursday 15 February 2007, Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 2 |
> > I think there is nothing bad in this. At least you know: |
| 3 |
> > - the bug you are reporting is already known |
| 4 |
> > - some dev has seen it repeteadly, and repetitia iuvant* |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > *"Repeating helps", for the non-Latin speakers :) |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Except that it generates extra work for maintainers who have to |
| 9 |
> mark the reported bug as a duplicate. If you've tripped over a |
| 10 |
> bug that's already been reported, perhaps adding a comment |
| 11 |
> (including how you triggered the bug) to an existing bug is |
| 12 |
> probably more productive. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
There's an upside as well though. If many people keep reporting the same |
| 15 |
bug in different ways, it tells themaintainer that the bug is higher |
| 16 |
priority. If a bug is reported only once, and everyone else that runs |
| 17 |
into it sees this bug report, and doesn't report their experience, then |
| 18 |
the maintainer doesn't know about these users. So he/she might consider |
| 19 |
the bug to be less important, and that would be wrong. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Good maintainers consider users to be like customers and sometimes they |
| 22 |
do get annoyed with many dup bugs. But usually they want reports and |
| 23 |
it's no big deal or effort actually to mark a bug as a dup. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
alan |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Optimists say the glass is half full, |
| 31 |
Pessimists say the glass is half empty, |
| 32 |
Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 35 |
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za |
| 36 |
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives