Re: Bug tracker?
Adrian Aichner writes:
Bugs will stay in the system forever.
I know. I just want to move the focus a bit. It is so easy to get stuck
in a fight for your favorite feature so you forget why we need the
tracker in the first place.
Hopefully they will make it to the fixed and even verified state
quickly.
Ideally a test will be written against each defect, so that deja vu
bugs will stay a lesser chance to silently sneak in.
If they do, the bug can just be re-opened again.
Bug history is another great feature of a good defect tracking system.
These are all good things but I think we should adopt a more iterative
approach. Take the need to reopen a bug. This needs only to be
implemented the day we find that we have had to reopen so many bugs that
we are getting bored in filing them again.
Anyway. If the feature debate can converge it is all good and well. I'm
not against having features. We should just don't forget that it is a tool.
My vote goes for roundup. Seems possible to use without to much work and
can be adjusted if needed in the future. (And I happen to like python!)
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta