> I hope I've made myself clear this time around. Defect reports, inasmuch as > they document a defect, should not be treated differently based on whether > there's a patch. The patch handling process is a separate issue.
I see what you're saying here, and you're clearer this time around, or (more likely) I'm less caffeine deprived. The reality is that patches and defects are already handled in a very different manner. We want quick turnaround time on patches to keep submitters happy, however defects are generally less time sensitive. I've seen two potential solutions here, either open another ticket when uploading a patch and reference the defect report. Or simply reopen the ticket with a comment saying "This is still a bug". Ideally when rejecting a patch that's attached to a 'bug ticket' we can simply get rid of the [PATCH] prefix to have it excluded from the reports. > > Do these steps apply for documentation as well? I'm not sure how to > > write a test for a documentation change. :) Is that possible? > > Same thing applies to test case fixes -- there's no test suite for the test > suite. Presumably with those they'd just go through the three reviewers > process. Same deal, get the reviews done, and obviously make sure the tests still pass :). -- Cheers Koz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
