From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-03 19:32:04
on Sat Nov 03 2007, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> http://boost.org/more/bugs.htm still says that the preferred way to
>>> report bugs is to send an email message. Do we really mean that?
>>> It's way more reliable to open a Trac ticket. Is there any reason not
>>> to change the "preferred" approach?
>> That might well lead to zillion Trac tickets to triage. It might make
>> sense to use a policy similar to subversion's:
>> 1. Post to list
>> 2. If somebody agrees it looks like a bug, and nobody jumps and
>> immediately fixes it, enter to Trac
> That sounds better to me, because bugs posted to the list often get
> fixed a lot faster. But I'd modify it slightly:
> 1. Post to list.
> 2. If it doesn't get fixed immediately, and no one points out it isn't
> really a bug, create a Trac bug report.
Here's my problem with Volodya's suggestion: I work with a lot of
open-source software and I find lots of problems. The policy
subversion uses is draconian (I recently went through it) and makes
people pay in great inconvenience to report bugs in the subversion
codebase. I was annoyed enough to feel as though reporting svn bugs
is probably not worth my time.
Here's my problem with Beman's suggestion: If I find a bug, I don't
have time to keep it on my radar screen. I need to get it reported.
It's highly likely that if I post about it to a list (which,
incidentally, I may have to subscribe to) and don't see a reply in the
first hour or so, I'm going to lose track of it.
I'd much rather have issues go directly into Trac and get closed
quickly than that they get lost.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk