Re: easy-fix keywords in bugzilla

On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 14:25, Chris Lyttle wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 10:56, Luis Villa wrote:
> > That's fine, and as far as I can tell, accurate. But in only one of
> > those bugs was there an explanation of /why/ it occurred. Adding
> > keywords like that when you aren't the maintainer and haven't left any
> > explanation /does/ cause confusion, though. 
> > 
> Luis,
> I dont know what the problem is here. You are going over something that
> was done last year, with discussion and acknowledgement of the
> maintainer and also at the time no mention was made of the need for any
> additional extra explanation. I was trying to help out darin and AFAIK
> what I was doing was what he wanted. Now you seem to be coming along
> after all this has gone by and saying 'bad, you did it wrong' when you
> had nothing to say at the time. I find this quite annoying and
> insulting. I dont mind doing things to make it easy for people to find
> the info they needed but pointing fingers long after the fact doesn't
> help at all to get bugs classified and fixed. 
> This sort of attitude makes it difficult for people like me to find the
> energy to help out when asked to.

Dude... you're blowing this all out of proportion :) It isn't a big
problem; I haven't retroactively changed anything; I haven't asked
anyone to change anything. I guess I can see how it would have come out
accusatory, but I certainly didn't mean it that way, and I apologize if
that is how it came across. It was intended in a more inquisitive and
suggestive manner.

To clarify, again, all that I'm saying is 'it isn't a good habit to make
bugzilla changes without explaining why in the bug; please don't in the
future, as it can confuse casual observers who are trying to understand
why something is easy-fix.'


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]