Nathan L. Adams wrote:
living. I know this fact: Sometimes the developer doesn't realise what
the actual problem is. Sometimes its because the end-user didn't
communicate well. Sometimes its because the developer is being an ass
(we've all been guilty of this). *That* is why verification should be
done not by the person writing the fix. It should be by an independent
party; Team Lead, reporter, etc.
a) what would be the point of the reporter also being the verifier as
far as confirming that the bug is real and not a PEBKAC error?
b) what would be the point of requiring that verification be done by a
third party if the dev the PR is assigned to can reproduce the bug
themselves?
c) how do you propose the assignee fix the bug if they cannot reproduce
it? this may be possible in some cases, but not anywhere near the majority.
d) team leads lead the team, not attempt to reproduce bugs for every PR
that falls under their umbrella. to be blunt, they have much better
things to do.
"Dear Developers Who Take Constructive Critizism as Insults,
Please grow thicker skin. No one is out to get you. Believe it or not,
the people trying to improve the process are on your side, and they're
not trying to insult you. No one is saying that because the process
could be better that your work is somehow diminished.
Sincerely,
Nathan
Dear Nathan,
In your spare time, could you please begin testing every new problem
report filed as of now for validity and tag them appropriately? This
small, incremental move should greatly improve our QA process. Thanks boo.
XOXOX
--de.
Note: I am not denying there could be a (small) policy problem, I'm just
pointing out that the proposed solution is unworkable.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
