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

Re: Version tracking in the BTS

On Monday 29 August 2005 21:59, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 08:50:24PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Also I don't think that "Patched" as a description for tag 'patch' is
> > correct. The bug has not been patched, there just is a _proposed_
> > patch available. There is no certainty that the patch is either
> > correct or will be accepted by the maintainer.
> If it's known to be incorrect or the maintainer's not going to accept
> it, the patch tag isn't appropriate:
>     A patch or some other easy procedure for fixing the bug is included
>     in the bug logs. If there's a patch, but it doesn't resolve the bug
>     adequately or causes some other problems, this tag should not be
>     used.

Thanks for the clarification. The reality however is that a lot of patches 
(of varying quality) are submitted to the BTS by others than the 
maintainer and may linger for quite a while before they are properly 
reviewed by the maintainer.
Having those bugs classified as "patched" IMO gives the wrong impression 
to casual readers (read non-developers) as it indicates that the problem 
has already been fixed.
I personally read "patched" as synonymous to "patch has been applied", 
which is just not true.

In an perfect world a maintainer would review each patch as it is 
submitted and remove the tag if the patch is not good. Reality is 
different, although I hope the recent enhancements to the BTS may help to 
get it used better.

Attachment: pgp2k32jBvWyJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: