Re: [boost] Re: Release Manager's Checklist added

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-09 08:25:30

At 07:56 AM 8/8/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote:
 >Daniel Frey wrote:
 >
 >> The trackers are IMHO a problem because they require a lot of work. The
 >> current state shows that it is not maintained well, e.g. there are open
 >> bugs which are long closed in CVS, see #451535. Sure we could do better
 >> in theory, but is it worth it? Why not use regression tests to track
 >> bugs? AFAICS people pay a lot of attention to the regression tests and
 >> the whole systems work pretty well.
 >
 >> Also, I hope that it could make the release manager's work easier to
 >> have fewer sources to track :)
 >
 >> OK, what do others think? Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable 
with
 >> the SF-trackers?
 >
 >The tracker is worse than useless if it is not actively supported.
 >Boost users who do not subscribe to the lists will submit bugs through
 >them, and wonder why they don't get the feedback they expect.  If bugs
 >are never marked closed, as you say, it looks bad on the project.
 >
 >OTOH, regression tests are only good for the conditions they test for.
 >If we expand the tests to cover every potential bug, I suspect we will
 >not have enough computers to run them on.  Bug trackers let you record
 >and deal with bugs that are not part of the main-line regression suite.
 >
 >As you can see, I am neither for-nor-agianst the bug tracker.  But I do
 >think we need to either adopt it, or disable it somehow.  It should not
 >be left as some half-way house.

Exactly!

--Beman