Strange Characters...

[J. Landman Gay]

On 5/14/2015 4:37 AM, Richmond wrote:
> RunRev's recent track record seems to be that bugs (at least those
> submitted by users) get picked at "random()"

A while back I posted the priorities used for bug fixes. They are not 
random; by necessity they are triaged.

> I think one of the best things RunRev could do at the moment is
> release a list of unsolved bugs alongside a schedule for sorting them
> out

The amount of effort that would take would substantially reduce the time 
available for the actual bug fixes, especially since it would have to be 
updated daily. There is also the fact that you never know how long it 
will take to fix a bug until you've fixed it. However, the team has done 
a very good job lately of testing and responding to every report 
promptly as it is opened. If you want a list of unresolved bugs so you 
can view their progress, it is trivial to get one by simply searching 
the database.

But don't judge the team by the number of unresolved reports you see. 
Before the new review system was implemented, responses were more 
haphazard. After the implementation, LC asked everyone with old bugs in 
the database to review them and close them if they were no longer 
relevant. Many of us did that but many did not. A lot of those ancient 
reports are now moot because subsequent engines have made them 
non-issues, but they sit there in limbo because the original author has 
not dealt with them. Again, the amount of effort required to go through 
all those, re-test, and remove them is substantial. Anyone with 
unresolved old bugs should test against the new engine and either close 
or update the report. The team would like to remove all nonrelevant 
material.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com