My priority is Maddalena and Leticia... btw if we have to accept "my issues are more important for me than all other bugs because these are the bugs that affect me. That's just how it works." you may accept that, for us, your issues are not so important for the project... and that's just how it works.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:00 AM, cremor <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, the bugs I've reported (and those I've voted for) are more > important for me than all other bugs because these are the bugs that > affect me. That's just how it works. Why is it a bad thing? > > As I wrote in the first post, I didn't create them as critical because > they are critical to me but because the Jira priority descriptions say > that crashes (exceptions) are "critical". The priority that they have > for me are quite different, some are lower because they happen only in > very rare cases, some are even "Blocker" because they completely block > my current work (and if it's just because I have to workaround them). > > Again: I don't want to criticize anyone here. NHibernate is great and > you fix most bugs by far faster than most other products I know. I > just don't understand your priorities. Writing my own Batcher is no > "simple workaround" in my opinion. > > On Jul 18, 3:35 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ah, nice suppositions. > > So, for the software you have payed there is no way to have something > fixed > > and the whole demand is to an OSS project not for a workaround but for > > "Critical" issue on two injectable pieces of the game (Driver and Batcher > > are injectable). > > > > The matter is that : Ogni scarrafone é bello a mamma soya (Naples > dialect) > > IT translation: each bug is the most important in the world for its > > reporter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:21 AM, cremor <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Concerning NH-2527: > > > Using a disposed object is against all rules, so Oracle would reject > > > such an issue, even if other DataProviders allow it. > > > > > Concerning NH-2792: > > > I don't know the specifications of DataProviders, so I don't know if > > > they shouldn't throw exceptions in that cases. Most likely this isn't > > > specified at all, so any implementation is "correct" and Oracle would > > > reject the issue. > > > > > So no, I didn't. > > > > > On Jul 18, 3:01 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Cremor, > > > > just to satisfy my curiosity, > > > > did you send the issue even to Oracle and/or Microsoft with > > > > the incongruousness with all others DataProviders implementations ? > > > > how they have classified the issue ? > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:38 AM, cremor <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In the past few months I have reported several bugs that either > throw > > > > > an exception directly in NHibernate code or generate invalid SQL > > > > > queries so that the data provider throws an exception. I have > created > > > > > all this issues with priority "critical" because the description of > > > > > "critical" says "Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak." (an > > > > > exception is a crash at least). > > > > > > > One of this bugs (https://nhibernate.jira.com/browse/NH-2527) was > even > > > > > changed to "Minor" ("Minor loss of function, or other problem where > > > > > easy workaround is present.") although there is NO workaround > present. > > > > > > > Could you please explain how you understand that priorities? Why is > > > > > something that always throws an exception in a very basic use-case > > > > > only a "minor" problem? > > > > > > > (In case someone understands this wrong: I know that a higher > priority > > > > > doesn't necessarily mean that it will be fixed faster. I really > just > > > > > want to know how you get to this priority levels because they are > > > > > clearly not like they are described in Jira.) > > > > > > -- > > > > Fabio Maulo > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > -- Fabio Maulo
