Re: Bugzilla? (was Re: Okay, I think I need some serious introduction;-)

[ ... redirected to 'bugbusters' ... ]

"Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > The problem with this approach is that it's possible to ignore
> > a PR to make it go away, without the underlying problem being
> > repaired/acknowledged.
> 
> And that is different then now, leaving it open?

The information is not destroyed that the bug was never in fact
actually resolved.

If you want to have a "I can't fit it" or "I won't fix it" status
for the bug, fine, but do not claim it is resolved when it can not
be proven, via a regression test, that it is, in fact, resolved.


> How many PRs right now contain patches that ppl have 'ignored'

All open ones with patches attached, of course.


> and, as a result, are no longer even relevant to the code?

You probably really mean "the code is no longer relevent to the patch",
since the patch has not changed in the interim; from the patch's point
of view, that translates to one of:

o	that the code was changed by someone who did not properly
	maintain the patch

o	that the code was changed by someone who did not properly
	check for a patch

o	that the current process failed to "lock" the section of
	code that the patch applied to, because the current process
	has a bug

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugbusters" in the body of the message