Mark's response was strong

Posted Apr 16, 2008 14:59 UTC (Wed) by mb (subscriber, #50428)
In reply to: Mark's response was strong by kirkengaard
Parent article: Bisection divides users and developers

> Having the time is the issue. Assuming the timestamps are valid for estimation purpose, the
> report was filed at 6:56, and his "If I had the time right now, maybe." comment was at
21:05.
> Between, he posted four times, each with more information from his bug-tracking work. That's
a
> lot of work product.

In that time he could easily have done a complete bisect instead.
bisect saves time for developers _and_ users.

Mark's response was strong

Posted Apr 16, 2008 17:39 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] (1 responses)

You're ignoring Mark's point.  I think he was right to push back a little.

If the automatic first response of developers is "go bisect it!" then that doesn't save time
for anybody.  Most bugs don't need a full bisection and many bugs won't bisect well well (as
noted by the article).

Both parties in this discussion had excellent points.  Ideally devs will have to compromise a
little by considering the bug report for 30 sec to reduce wild goose chases and making users
feel like they're getting the runaround.  Users will have to compromise a little more because
they scale.

In an ideal world.  :)

Mark's response was strong

Posted Apr 16, 2008 17:58 UTC (Wed) by mb (subscriber, #50428) [Link]

> If the automatic first response of developers is "go bisect it!" then that doesn't save time
> for anybody.  Most bugs don't need a full bisection and many bugs won't bisect well well (as
> noted by the article).

Ok, point accepted. :)