On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 11:32:44 -0400 "Nathan L. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > Again, Gentoo is not a large corporation or Debian. | | I don't see how Gentoo's status (or rather lack thereof) as a | corporation or Debian has anything to do with encouraging peer review.
You're taking methods from a "how your typical oversized software engineering bloatware project works" situation and trying to apply them outside of their domain. | > The assumption is | > that the majority of fixes are done correctly the first time, and | > this assumption is valid. | | I don't see how you could prove that assumption. If you can, please do | so. Experience. I receive bug mail for a heck of a lot of bugs. I see how many of them are indeed correctly resolved when they are marked as such. | > Hence, the default behaviour is to mark bugs as | > RESOLVED, with reopening being an entirely legitimate and encouraged | > response for those occasional instances where the resolution was not | > sufficient. | > | | There are plenty of devs who don't share in the viewpoint that | reopening bugs is legitimate and should encouraged (although I agree | it is and should be). I base opinion that on some of the kicking and | screaming I've seen on bugzilla in the past. ;) No, that kicking and screaming is reserved for when bugs are reopened inappropriately. -- Ciaran McCreesh -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
