- About Scala
- Documentation
- Code Examples
- Software
- Scala Developers
Re: internal scalac crashes in eclipse plugin
Wed, 2009-02-18, 21:09
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Ismael Juma <mlists@juma.me.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 19:45 +0000, Miles Sabin wrote:
> What didn't happen that you would have like to have happened?
I think Thomas is saying that he feels like the bug was fixed as a
result of normal development instead of the reported bug. As such, he
feels like the time he spent on his bug report was not worth it.
Thanks Ismael, couldn't of have said it better.
I don't think much can be done about that, and it is the kind of thing
that will sort itself out as the plugin codebase becomes more mature
(not that I see it as a big problem since the the bug got fixed and that
is the main aim in reporting it).
This is another point I had. 2.7.3-final kind of looks to me like "Stable" or "Production". If that is not the case, to maybe issues should be reported only in the future "FINAL" version. I'm ok with constant improvement. But asking people to report hard to get bugs is only really valid if they will fold into the test-cases or development cycle.
And it's not a big problem to report things(it just take time). If the bulk of the work is on new code and features and bug fix is a by product, I'm cool for that. Just makes me think twice before going the extra mile to do a nice report. Could be nice to simply have a "weird behavior list".
Answering Miles, I think the really nice thing to have is a clear guideline on how bugs should be reported and what to expect. E.g.:
Report on a version: Try the standalone compiler, if possible go to nightly build of the compiler and check again. It's still there report it. Note: bugs will only be tackled while they happen on the latest build.
That's ok for a policy, specially if it's clear.
Thomas
Thu, 2009-02-19, 00:57
#2
Re: internal scalac crashes in eclipse plugin
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Thomas Sant Ana <mailleux@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Ismael Juma <mlists@juma.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 19:45 +0000, Miles Sabin wrote:
>> > What didn't happen that you would have like to have happened?
>>
>> I think Thomas is saying that he feels like the bug was fixed as a
>> result of normal development instead of the reported bug. As such, he
>> feels like the time he spent on his bug report was not worth it.
>
> Thanks Ismael, couldn't of have said it better.
This I really can't fathom. It's the same line of argument that would
lead you to conclude that because the majority in an election was
greater than one that your vote was wasted.
Thomas, if you (or anyone else for that matter) would like personal
attention to your bugs over and above what happens in the course of
normal development then by all means feel free to contact me off-list
and we can talk about putting together a support contract of some
sort.
Seems a fair approach.
I did not really require any special attention, I just wanted to help improve the plugin and got upset with not knowing if the report served to help. That got me a little "negative" about the process. But it's true that non of the issues reported should up in subsequent releases.
I think my comments on this post may have hurt more than done any good. For that I apologize. I think that work on the plugin has resulted in a much better plugin. As I said earlier, despite the gliches the plugin is very functional.
I'd recommend anyone to go ahead and report issues, specially if they have small example that causes the issue. After all this will in some way either document the issues or contribute with future corrections. I have tried contributing bug reports and sometimes fixes (when I have the capability) in all project that I used in the past. After all it's only fair to help improve stuff we like and that is put together by the effort and volunteer contributions of so many people.
Thomas
Thu, 2009-02-19, 10:27
#3
RE: internal scalac crashes in eclipse plugin
> On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 19:45 +0000, Miles Sabin wrote:
> > What didn't happen that you would have like to have happened?
>
>
> I think Thomas is saying that he feels like the bug was
> fixed as a result of normal development instead of the reported
> bug. As such, he feels like the time he spent on his bug report
> was not worth it.
Did the report somehow add something to the (regression)
test suite?
Than it was worth the effort, regardless of how the bug
vanished eventually.
I every now and then make more than trivial changes to
a system, causing formerly non-related or only vaguely
related issues to get fixed without even paying attention
to them.
When the test-suite that documents the issues runs and
the bugs are gone, the reports are closed and all are
happy.
All further development must ensure that formerly passed
tests don't break again anyway.
I indeed fixed sometimes non-reported issues casually
(as told some colleagues), but some appeared in later
releases again, as they never went into the test-suite.
KR
Det
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Thomas Sant Ana wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Ismael Juma wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 19:45 +0000, Miles Sabin wrote:
>> > What didn't happen that you would have like to have happened?
>>
>> I think Thomas is saying that he feels like the bug was fixed as a
>> result of normal development instead of the reported bug. As such, he
>> feels like the time he spent on his bug report was not worth it.
>
> Thanks Ismael, couldn't of have said it better.
This I really can't fathom. It's the same line of argument that would
lead you to conclude that because the majority in an election was
greater than one that your vote was wasted.
Thomas, if you (or anyone else for that matter) would like personal
attention to your bugs over and above what happens in the course of
normal development then by all means feel free to contact me off-list
and we can talk about putting together a support contract of some
sort.
Cheers,
Miles