Give a bug a hug

[Curry Kenworthy]

William:

 > where the programming effort to fix the funded bug will come from.

That's a very good que... - er, a good example of a reactionary and 
blasphemous anti-bug question. I luvv buggs and perish the thought of 
losing even a single precious one.

Actually we don't need to presume too much; the Mothership almost 
certainly has some bug plans already in the works for the near future. 
I'd bet on that.

But since my daily work often involves LC bugs, they are never 
outta-sight, outta-mind. And there are more than a few. A good healthy 
population indeed. It's not invisible. I'm knee-deep among the 
(wonderful, blessed, amazing) bugs almost every single day in my job. 
Can't help noticing when they pile up - and they have. Objectively, we 
have to admit that the bugs are just as big a part of "what's happening" 
here as any other news.

So here are a few other questions to ponder, and none of these are aimed 
at you William; those are very good thoughts and I'm just adding a few 
more as food for thought. I also think Richmond's bug-funding plans are 
great. And other efforts.

1. Where do bugs actually come from? Do they spontaneously come into 
existence, or do they originate from causes and events? ...

2. And therefore, if there isn't time to FIX them, then how is there 
time to CREATE them in the first place?

Where does THAT time come from? Because yes, bugs are created, so often 
people don't realize that, and it takes actual time and effort to create 
bugs. Even though they may be very unconscious actions or omissions, yet 
they were ultimately the product/result of intentional actions and 
habits. Thus any techniques to reduce their creation in the first place 
would be ... of course, would be a holocaust against bugs and something 
I abhor as a dedicated bug-lover. But any profession including coding 
can be done by two people for the same cost, yet have different results. 
People can learn to improve habits and approaches.

3. Are there any other prerequisites to fixing bugs besides $$$ and 
coders? Well, you sorta have to know they exist before you can fix them. 
They have to be discovered, reciped, reported. Ironically some people 
consider bug talk "negative" - especially if they don't stop to consider 
what leads to the bug-fixing process. Someone has to notice it, or test 
thoroughly and discover it, pin down, recipe, report. And usually that 
simply doesn't happen by, well, keeping one's mind completely off bugs 
and focusing entirely on the non-bug stuff. Quite the reverse!

4. Are there legitimate reasons for customers being sorta busy too, and 
having their own financial responsibilities? In other words, should we 
all devote ourselves largely to volunteer bugfixing, or to volunteer 
recruiting for paid bugfixing? Working around bugs certainly can keep a 
body busy. And (ever since LC 7) so can reporting bugs - LC 7 bugs are 
still being reported, by the way. Too many bugs also reduce customer 
efficiency. Oh yes, and then there's the original work itself, the thing 
one was doing before confronting the bugs. I mention this because some 
people who previously repeated the mantra "if you see it, report it" are 
starting to say "do you want to just gripe, or actually do something 
about it yourself!"

It's convincing, with "positive" spin - and I like the focus on 
accomplishment. But unfortunately the mantra also comes at the expense 
of some truth, implying that complainers may be lazy and motivated by 
negativity while they twiddle thumbs and gripe rather than act. I supect 
that many "complainers" - or in more unbiased and less negative terms, 
"attention raisers" - are busy with a full plate and speak up while 
taking a breather, about the relevant matters they've been dealing with 
in LC, before diving right back in.

5. Finally, perhaps most importantly, is it simply unthinkable for the 
creator of a subscription-style annual fee product to actually fix the 
bugs of that product all by themselves? Should a subscribing customer be 
able to have reasonable expectations of bug fixes, or is that completely 
on the shoulders of the paying customer to pay for or perhaps DIY?

IMPORTANT NOTE - I'm not saying that this applies to LC themselves. 
They've always fixed many bugs; they've more than proven their 
responsible and dedicated habit of doing so, and no doubt that will 
continue as usual. In fact, they just said as much, the way I read it. 
I'm very confident of that, perhaps more so than anyone else here.

No, I'm asking this customer vs bug fix question to respond to these 
community memes - there is currently a push by some to shift bug 
responsibility to the customer, with very assertive arguments. The 
effort to solve problems actively is useful, but the accompanying mantra 
overlooks that not everyone at all times has free time, energy, and 
money for such efforts.

A customer is actually doing a company a service by bringing attention 
to a problem; an information asset. Customers need to understand that 
features and fixes can take time, and releases can take time. But if the 
"positivity" school of thought gets out of hand and discourages true 
feedback, the result may be damage due to reduced awareness. Plus the 
positivity mantra seems to be ironically characterized by labeling 
everything and everyone else negative. Which is it again? :D

My concern for LC bugs is a reduction in "net" bugs over time and in any 
given "final" version, especially some care during new product and 
feature sprints, because without limiting the rate of introducing bugs, 
it may be even more difficult to tackle them, even with extra efforts. 
They can't sustainably be introduced faster than they can be fixed.

Also, standalones for end-users are built with a particular LC version. 
Too often a new final version (compared to the previous final version) 
fixes one or two problems relevant to a project while adding one or two 
more, also relevant. Despite the multiple meanings of stable which we 
know, there still is a need for getting closer to final version = pretty 
reliable, with few bugs.

Those are the more serious questions behind my light-hearted bug-hugging 
post.

 > In that vein, perhaps a system of bidding for bug fixes on
 > the “auction block” could be developed.

That would be a smart addition. I do think that paying for bug fixes for 
a SUBSCRIPTION product should be an addition, and not a substitute for 
company bug fixes - and I'm not implying that LC Ltd is moving away from 
that. Just responding to some community memes.

As usual I didn't really have the time to comment here again, and going 
in depth like this might even tempt a certain person famous for lengthy 
posts (see the archives) to accuse me of a lengthy post. :D But I felt 
that the memes and assumptions needed some balancing out. Ideas are 
important! Some things are worth speaking up about.

This represents a break from work that includes doing precisely one of 
the tasks necessary to help this bug problem - I've been finding and 
reporting a big bodacious boatload of beautiful bouncing beastly bugs. 
God bless 'em. All kinds of bugs. Plenty left, if you need some. ;) It's 
interesting and fun work, I actually enjoy pinning down bugs, but when I 
find too many for too long, I worry a bit.

I'm outta here again, back to coding and bug reporting! Take care. Nice 
seeing everyone. And don't forget to hug a bug today, or else....

JJS:

 > As long as you pay then everything gets fixed,
 > even new tires and maintenance..

Yep! Very true point.

More often than you would suppose, a fix is worth extra payment, 
especially for a much-needed quick fix or extra feature that enables a 
product release.

BUT those are special cases. A punctual annual subscription model very 
strongly implies some level of included maintenance. Once again, I'm 
100% sure that LC believes in this principle too, no slur on them; just 
generally discussing a topic that's already being discussed.

Meanwhile, from a variety of comments lately it's clear that people are 
noticing the bugs. Hang in there people! Good things are coming....

Best wishes,

Curry K.