On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter <head...@headius.com> wrote: > I should elaborate on this slightly. I think it is valid to have a bug > in the tracker for failing specs under these circumstances: > > 1. If work has started on the bug and it requires a place for discussion. > 2. If there's already a bug filed with *useful* discussion. > 3. If there's a patch that requires review. This mostly falls under (1) above. > > If you want to help tidy up JRuby's bug tracker, feel free to close as > "incomplete" any RubySpec bugs that are solely there to be bugs (i.e. > no useful discussion, no patches, etc). There may be a lot of them. > > Any objections to this policy?
Yes. I completely agree bugs like 'Math spec failing' suck since they don't really tell you what is broken and they also are also possibly open-ended depending on when we update our spec tags. I would like an issue filed at least for issues which we are working that fixes an invidual spec/expecation. I want this so we can report what got fixed when we put out a release. So this is sort of like your #2 but it is not dependent on useful discussion happening. We could do this so that if you fix a spec you also open a bug to indicate you are fixing it and then it doubles as documentation. So these issues only show up when someone tried to tackle fixing an individual spec failure. If they cannot finish we at least capture some information explaining what difficulties they ran into. So I still want people creating issues for spec failures, but I want them more fine-grained to capture individual problems and I only want them created if: a) You are a developer trying to fix the issue b) You are a user who ran into a real world issue and you happen to think fixing a particular spec error will fix your real world issue. -Tom > > - Charlie > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter > <head...@headius.com> wrote: >> I think it's no longer in our interest to clog the bug tracker with >> failing specs. They're failing and we have tags for them, so we know >> about them. Only user bugs should go in the tracker, since they >> represent a failure that affected a user. >> >> This is a new policy so don't feel bad if you filed RubySpec failures >> as bugs recently :) I have been by far the worst offender. >> >> - Charlie >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > -- blog: http://blog.enebo.com twitter: tom_enebo mail: tom.en...@gmail.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
