| |||||||||||||
regression vs bugregression vs bugPosted May 3, 2007 17:40 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: a question by ekj Parent article: A tale of two release cycles To be precise, you have to call what we're discussing here a "regression bug." Because there are regressions that are not bugs. A bug is where the product does not work as designed. Sometimes you design a release to lack functions the previous release had, so the release contains a regression, but not a bug. Design regressions cause all the same damage as regression bugs (breaks expectations, causes people not to "upgrade"), but the process for eliminating them is entirely different. BTW, "regression" is from the Latin for "to step back."
(Log in to post comments)
regression vs bug Posted May 4, 2007 17:48 UTC (Fri) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] To give another kind of non-bug regressions:
A performance degradation is a regression too, while it's not always caused by a bug. So nothing stopped working, something just worked less well than it used to.
|
|||||||||||||