In my time working on an old system, I found the statement "they are so
old that if the bug still exists there is probably a newer ticket" to be
false multiple times. Large systems hide many obscure bugs, some of
which are rarely encountered. And sometimes the oldest symptom is the
clearest one. I have always found that more tests is best; so even when
I closed old bugs as 'magically fixed' in Maple, I still created a
regression test for it.
Jacques
On 2019-05-04 5:56 p.m., Matthew Pickering wrote:
I'm not sure the benefit of marking these tickets obsolete is. You may
as well just close them. Someone can reopen them if they disagree.
There could be some arguent for adding tests from these old tickets
but tbh they are so old that if the bug still exists there is probably
a newer ticket.
On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 10:31 PM Kevin Buhr <[email protected]> wrote:
Okay, I've added a new "obsolete" label: "Old issues that no longer
apply and are in a short waiting period before closing." I'll start
going through the low-hanging fruit adding comments and sticking this
label on them, with the idea of going back and closing them after, say,
4 weeks with no complaints. After I've gone through a few of these and
gained some experience with it, I'll try to draft some guidelines for
handling old tickets.
Anyway, please let me know if this process starts to get irritating.
--
Kevin Buhr <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
