On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:07:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Steve Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The useful bug tracking systems I've used have also included QA. Any > > bug submitted doesn't get accepted without a standalone test case. > > Side note: while test cases are certainly Good Things that make life > easier for developers, so we should encourage people to provide 'em, > I can't say that I like the idea of a tracking system designed around > the concept that a bug for which you don't have a test case isn't real. > It's not all that easy to make a test case for bugs involving concurrent > behavior. I'd go so far as to say that most of the seriously > interesting bugs that I've dealt with in this project were ones that the > original reporter didn't have a reproducible test case for.
Depends on the context. For a code base like PGs (with, as you say, many possibilities for weird concurrency issues or data driven bugs), or for a development style like PGs (i.e. mostly volunteer), _requiring_ a test case before a bug is worked on makes no sense. Some environments I've worked in, though, have had a stage between "bug submitted" and "bug passed to developer" where someone in QA makes an attempt to create a test case where one was not submitted with the bug. That was more the idea I was suggesting as a possibility - if someone has a QA itch to scratch then trolling postgresql-bugs for bugs without test cases and creating recreatable test cases to attach to those bugs might be a useful thing to do. Cheers, Steve ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])