On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 04:27:50AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | Perhaps you would like to clarify what bugzilla is for if it's not
> | for listing bugs in lyx
>
> Surely for listing bugs... but what is a bug? f.ex is reports about qt
> interesting _now_, when we know that once 1.3.0CVS opens up huge
> things will happen to it? Isn't it then better to start with clean
> sheets and not drag along bugs reported with older/outdated versions.
I've already stated twice that this will not change this bug. And the
minute it does change I will know and close the bug.
when I get bored of lyx and no longer maintain the bug database, /then/
you can go about closing bugs in my code that is assigned to me.
We've already had two reports to the list about this particular Qt bug
(the crashing on double click) from testers, so yes, it is interesting.
Furthermore it's handy for me to list my bugs and be able to see
what I need to do still, so I can plan my work.
> I also do not want working with bugzill to be like fighting
> windmills... the number of bugs just goes up and up since we never
> close "unfixed" bugs. IMHO bugs that does not have complete info, and
> when that info is not provided the bug should be closed.
If you are accusing me of not maintaining the LyX bugzilla I'd like to
see some evidence from you.
Do you really need more info on "searching displays inset traversal" ?
Of course not, we all know the problem and we know it's going to get
fixed. When it gets fixed I will close the bug. And this will fire off
an email to any users who have a Cc: on the bug. This is another of the
main advantages of having a decent bug tracking system, the users can
keep at least some tabs on their least favourite bugs.
The tracker is particularly important for minor issues that people
forget need fixing - the tracker doesn't forget.
> What I am really afraid of is stale bugreports.
So it seems. But this is completely unfounded. How many times have you
asked in a bug "is this still here ?" ? 10 times or so ? And how many
times has it been fixed in the interim ? Maybe once ? (I forget)
One of the worst problems when I started hacking on LyX is that I had no
idea of the history of the bugs. In particular, the gs hang bug (after
my first email to the list on the matter was effectively dismissed) I
had to work out based on cryptic remarks in the source, and a lot of
debugging. If a tracker had been there with an open bug on the issue I
would have honed in on it, mentioned I was working on it, read the
comments already there on what it definitely /wasn't/, etc.
When you WONTFIX a bug that effectively means that the bug doesn't exist
- nobody looks through resolved bugs.
WONTFIX is appropriate for things like minipage compat read, which we
can imagine that in fact relaly won't ever get fixed. Not for stuff
that's still open and will get fixed for the next release in all
probability.
please reconsider,
john
p.s. oops I appear to have ranted on a little too long ...
--
"Please let's not resume the argument with the usual whining about how this
feature will wipe out humanity or bring us to the promised land."
- Charles Campbell on magic words in Subject: headers
