> >So are you saying that "Zarro Boogs" should be changed to the more
> >explicit "I didn't find your bug but that doesn't mean it's not in here.
> >Try searching again"?
>
> Oh for sure. It might be amusing (though I can't recall when that actually
> was for me), but its as informative as 'my left splonk now no longer
> gastrosizes'.
It is explained in the Help. And every project has to have fun
idiosyncrasies. After all, we have a newsgroup called
netscape.public.mozilla.porkjockeys.
> >Are you involved with QAing or fixing them? :-) Seriously, query Bugzilla
> >for the number of open bugs, and then ask yourself if we don't have enough
> >to be getting on with...
>
> Occasionally I fix ones in the trunk yes, I fix all my own. I run a test
> plan of three platforms here and I QA every change that happens here. The
> number of open bugs is a red herring, would you rather have fewer open bugs
> and a shittier product?
This presupposed that filing more bugs improves the product. Given the
amount of triage that the Netscape internal process (particularly) feels
it has to apply to each bug, I think that we are at the point where filing
more will actually reduce quality, because developers will spend more time
sifting through them and less time fixing stuff.
I also think that all the major issues with Mozilla have been spotted by
now! And even if they haven't, why don't we take a month, fix loads of
stuff, and then let people see what's still a problem?
Gerv
