David Abrahams wrote:
on Wed Oct 31 2007, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
Marshall Clow wrote:
Dave Abrahams wrote:
http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=severity&milestone=Boost+1.35.0&order=priority shows all the tickets that have been assigned to the 1.35.0 milestone. Does this list have any meaning? In other words, are we actually intending to address all of these problems for 1.35, and put off other tickets for 1.35.1 or 1.36.0? Personally, I'd like to see all the submitted patches "dealt with" for 1.35. Either apply them or reject them. [ There are about 50 outstanding patches ] Patches seem a particularly high priority to me, too.
I've reproduced the latest patch report from Marshall so we can all see who the guilty parties are:-)
Developers, now is a great time to clear your outstanding patches!
IMO, promising patches that are merely new features that haven't been in testing for some time should be assigned to the 1.36.0 milestone rather than "cleared" by either integrating them or rejecting them.
Yep. I was assuming patches were bug fixes, which may not be the case.
Patches should only be a high priority if they fix bugs... and in that case they should come with a test that breaks until the bug is fixed.
It is very useful and a sign of good software engineering if a test case accompanies a bug fix. But patch submitters don't always have enough time or knowledge of a library's test setup to submit test cases. I'd rather fixes be prioritized based on severity rather than whether or not they come with a test case. --Beman