Boost logo

Boost :

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
>> 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.



Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at