On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 08:48:20AM -0700, Josh Peek wrote:
> On Jul 14, 6:13 am, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What would happen if a bug was reported by one person but an incomplete
> > patch contributed by someone else?  Would the report get closed (which to
> > the initial reporter suggests the issue is solved) because the patch is
> > dodgy?
> 
> Usually patches with good units tests that prove a bug are fixed
> rather quickly.

(Good thing you put 'usually' in there, because I've got a patch in the
system that fixes a bug in the *test suite* that's been hanging for over a
week now)

Is it the policy of the Rails project that defect reports without a
verifiable test case are invalid and will be closed?

If a project was going to adopt that policy, something like Rails would be
the most likely to be able to pull it off, because every user should be a
developer.  Having spent a few hours a day the last few weeks helping on the
#rubyonrails IRC channel, though, I'm not sure it's a practical proposition
-- most people don't "get" testing, and plenty of Rails' users aren't
sufficiently good programmers to be able to write a solid test case for
something as complex as Rails.

> The problem is we have tons of unverified (and bogus)
> defect reports with no easy way to prove them.

So mark them "more info required" with a note that they need to have more
info attached or they'll be closed in N days/weeks/months.

> No one has the time to
> personally debug someone elses problems.

<advocate type="devil">
 That cuts both ways, though -- I, as a developer, don't have time to debug a
 problem in Rails.  That problem isn't mine -- I didn't write the buggy code
 that's causing the hassle.  It's *your* fault, dammit.
</advocate>

In reality, I know all about the OSS project philosophy, I'm a great
believer in it myself.  If you want support, take out a support contract,
and all that.

Going back to my original point, though, about actively *closing* tickets
that document *real* bugs that are trivially verifiable[1] simply because
the patch isn't sufficient is only reasonable in one circumstance -- if
defect reports without test cases are summarily closed.  I haven't seen that
policy documented anywhere (and I would imagine something that it would want
to be in big letters on the front page), and in fact the exact opposite is
stated on the dev front page -- "Tickets are fine".  I'm just reporting an
irritating inconsistency in the handling of tickets, biased against
well-meaning but insufficiently clued contributors (which are the sort of
people I'd be wanting to encourage, not discourage, if it were my project).

- Matt

[1] one of the bugs I found I didn't even have to run the code to find it --
a desk check was enough to make it perfectly obvious.
-- 
Microsoft: We took the "perfect" out of "Wordperfect"

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to