Gervase Markham wrote:
> There's a bug open "Implement support for <LINK>".
> We're about to fix it,
maybe we need to redefine bug? collabnet did. microsoft redefined feature.
catfood? how about 'bad tuna' we could start reporting issues as 'bad tuna' this
urlbar is just /bad tuna/.
dogfood? how about 'bad horse' we could start reporting issues as 'bad glue' this
profile manager just /smells like bad glue/.
> but there are a few extra things we'd like to do after it's fixed.
> So, when it's checked in, another few bugs will be opened.
ooh goody more tunamail (tunameal).
hrm there's already a http://www.terravista.pt/fernoronha/5933/Tuna/Tunamail.html
> So, this checkin makes the number of "bugs" in Bugzilla go up. Does it
> mean Mozilla is more buggy? That's not a question with an obvious answer.
It definitely makes bugzilla.mozilla.org more bug(gy) fil(l)ed :) [bCk coming to a
mailbox near you] and my mailbox more bug(mail) filled...
> Open bug counts are not a reliable metric of anything except the size of
> the Mozilla testing community.
testing is also defined loosely to include people who like to do usability testing
based on pipe dreams.
and qa people who are overzealous in splitting hairs and ...
