[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partn
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file. |
Date: |
Thu, 9 Sep 2004 12:59:30 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: David Allouche <address@hidden>
> On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 16:30 -0700, Tom Lord wrote:
> > > From: address@hidden (James Blackwell)
> > > In fact, let's up the ante a little bit. If you not only find a
bug, but
> > > provide a test case that A) passes with 1.2.1 but B) fails with
> > > 1.2.2rc1, I'll _double_ the award!
> > Now you are taking the development philosophy:
> > Make only correctness-preserving/enhancing changes to the
> > program.
> > to a (eventually dangerous?) new level.
> I am not sure I understand what you mean.
> The intention does not seem to be "we must not fix old bugs in the
> stable version" but more something like "we should not do anything but
> fix regressions once rc1 is out".
> I expect the various issues which have been raised (apply-delta w/o
> default archive, explicit tag of files in {arch}) to be acceptable to
> fix in the stable branch once 1.2.2 is out.
Yes, you did not understand what I mean! :-)
Successive releases of arch should fix bugs and add features. Either
way, no change to arch should break something that already works.
Another way to say that: "all changes must be `correctness
preserving or enhancing'."
A new feature that doesn't break anything already there is
"correctness preserving".
A change that fixes bugs or edge cases is "correctness enhancing".
To be more precise, I guess I should say that the goal is for changes
which are "correctness preserving AND correctness enhancing".
Saying "or" instead of "and" was misleading.
Now, with that general goal, jblack has put $10 of his own money on
the line --- betting that he has admitted only changes which are, at
least, "correctness preserving".
Prove him wrong and you win $10!
Why dangerous? Uh.... the politics of labor generally and,
specifically, the implied opportunities to "game" this reward system
to somebody else's detriment.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Harald Meland, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Aaron Bentley, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Matthieu Moy, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., James Blackwell, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Tom Lord, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Bruce Stephens, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Matthieu Moy, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., David Allouche, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., James Blackwell, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Tom Lord, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [NOT-BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file.,
Tom Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: The bugfixing contest, James Blackwell, 2004/09/09
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: The bugfixing contest, Stefan Monnier, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: The bugfixing contest, James Blackwell, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: The bugfixing contest, Aaron Bentley, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: The bugfixing contest, Tom Lord, 2004/09/09
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] tla 1.2.2rc1 doesn't accept {arch}/=partner-versions file., Jan Hudec, 2004/09/09