Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 16:27:59 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Cc: Joseph Koshy <jkoshy@FreeBSD.ORG>, eivind@hub.freebsd.org, committers@hub.freebsd.org, vanmaren@fast.cs.utah.edu Subject: Re: Swat teams (was: problem reports) Message-ID: <19981210162759.G12688@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.02.9812092335240.4915-100000@fly.HiWAAY.net>; from Steve Price on Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 11:47:55PM -0600 References: <19981210154234.D12688@freebie.lemis.com> <Pine.OSF.4.02.9812092335240.4915-100000@fly.HiWAAY.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 9 December 1998 at 23:47:55 -0600, Steve Price wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Greg Lehey wrote: > > # From what I've seen, the big problem is not the cases where people > # submit patches, but where they submit PRs with no fix and with hardly > # enough information to guess what the problem is (or even if there is a > # problem). That's certainly what I found at Tandem, when I was > # insulated from the customers by a layer of supposedly intelligent and > # educuated ``analysts''. > > Yes, having a patch makes things much easier, but as Bruce > will argue, just because there is a patch doesn't mean it is > correct. Sure. But it makes it more plausible that there is a problem in the first place than if there is no patch. And as Koshy says, we should encourage (must) people who submit patches. > I know for me at least it is convenient to be able to look at the > some 1600+ PRs that are still open and pick out the ones that are > easier to fix. I've been trying to prepend '[patch]' to the ones > that have patches that seem reasonably correct. Does anybody else > see this as being a benificial practice? In principle, yes. I think we need a better way of classifying PRs generally. You'll notice in the document I sent out earlier today that we used to do this sort of thing at Tandem, and it helped a lot. I don't know, though, if the best way to do this is in the brief description. > You are also spot on that the hardest ones to deal with are the ones > with very little information. The thing that really gets my goat is > the vast majority of these are sent from people who's Email address > is incorrect or otherwise inoperable. This makes it *very* > difficult to get more information when the replies bounce. :( Right. The trouble is that most people feel it's an imposition to fill out a detailed description of the problem in the first place. Dammit, the software's broken, right? So why should they do all the work? The funny thing is, they thought just the same thing at Tandem, where they were being paid to do the work. Greg -- See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981210162759.G12688>