Re: [boost] Will 1.45 incorporate active regression tickets?

Subject: Re: [boost] Will 1.45 incorporate active regression tickets?
From: Marshall Clow (mclow.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-02 12:43:46

On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:04 AM, Jim Bell wrote:
> On 1:59 PM, Patrick Horgan wrote:
>> On 10/31/2010 08:11 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
>>> ... elision by patrick >8 ...
>>> While I'm not a release manager, I looked at a few of them; and I'm
>>> wondering if there's a disagreement here about what constitutes a
>>> "regression".
>>> 
>>> To me, that means that the code has "regressed", or gotten worse.
>>> Something that worked in a previous release no longer works - that's
>>> a "regression"
>> You're right.   It has two common meanings in bugs:
>> 
>> 1) a trend or shift toward a lower or less perfect state
>>    i.e. there's a new bug that didn't use to be there.
>> 2) a movement backward to a previous and especially worse or more
>> primitive state
>>    i.e. a bug that was previously fixed is back, or a new feature has
>> disappeared.
>> 
>> [...]
>> All bugs are bugs whether they're regressions or not.
> 
> I was defining it more tangibly as yellow on the regression matrix, but,
> yes, that could be from something going from green to yellow (your
> definition) or something going from not-being-there-before to yellow
> (i.e., a new platform).
> 
> Could someone nail down the definition in the appropriate place (Wiki)?
> This would be important for the new wave of volunteers being discussed.

I've updated the <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/TicketWorkflow> page on the wiki with a first cut.
Feedback solicited/welcomed

-- Marshall