jesus X wrote: > > Blake Ross wrote: > > > > Fact: you are terribly misinformed. > > > > The number of bugs has skyrocketed over the years because the number of > > people reporting them has skyrocketed over the years, and because we > > have more features and components than we used to. Statistics > > corroborate this. You seem to be suggesting that developers get worse > > over time and start creating more bugs per checkin, which doesn't make > > any sense. > > A certain anti-news/FUD site relating to Mozilla uses similarly fuzzy math, > which has been thoroughly dispelled at MozillaNews.org in the "Lies, Damned > Lies, and MozillaQuest" article, located here: > http://www.mozillanews.org/index.php3?article=60 > > You are 100% right. In fact, I call it Bugzilla Inflation, and go into detail in > that article under the Bugzilla Inflation and Bugzilla Facts sections. thanks go > to Asa for helping me compile those numbers, too.
AH! So *THE LORD* is the one behind that article! Wonderful! Why no attribution, or did I just miss it? Anyway, perhaps then rabbi you could explain this little gem of apologetics from that gem of an apologetic article: "To get technical for just a moment, the total number of bugs at any given time is a function of the number of Bugzilla reporters, not a function of the quality of Mozilla." So you mean to say that: N_bugs_in_bugzilla = A * N_registered_bugzilla_users for some suitable A? ??? That's what your sentence says. If that's what you actually meant to say, then can you explain to me what possible use bugzilla is? All it does then is track entries made by registered users, which may in fact be bugs in Mozilla, or bugs in other products, or recipies, or porn, or maybe they're just using it as a substitute for NNTP or email, whatever. BTW: I know you won't take this for what it's worth, but I read both articles in their entirety. While yours is written better, his is more factually correct and less biased.
