On Wednesday 08 July 2009, Zach Welch wrote: > Asking the users to test the SVN is asking > them to do everything that a developer must do.
Not "everything" by far! "configure; make; run". > That is an unacceptable > process for users, as it will result in more false reports from failed > (re)building than it will help test the bug. Build bugs need fixing, regardless. Especially if "we" are not in the support-binary-builds end of the business. But for the record ... standard process for bug reporters in Linux most typically involves getting the submitter to build *current* stuff to verify the bug still exists. If the kernel isn't current, it's very likely that at least some of the symptoms changed; maybe the bug is fully fixed! It's impractical to support users who are on code so old the developers can't use it. At least, not without some kind of paid support contract ... and at that point, it's not the developers who are supporting the old code base. Plus ... this *is* open source. One of the strengths of those processes is that they make it easy to morph from user to developer, as the need arises. So IMO it's more than counterproductive to draw a circle with "developers" inside, and everyone else outside. Going back and forth should be no big deal whatsoever. It should be *easy* to contribute. If it seems hard ... that's worth fixing. - Dave _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
