dwex
> - If you're not gonna fix something, then just say "we're not gonna fix that". Without saying anything, we have no alternative but to re-report the bug. Hence needless noise to wade through that could have been avoided simply by saying "doesn't make it over the bug bar".
dwex, "we're not gonna fix that". The process is working (for us). In many cases, it isn't possible to say "we're not gonna fix that" because we don't know whether it is a problem or not. Information is pouring in all the time and we are constantly re-evaluating it.
If the process is unsatisfactory, your best option may be not to participate. (I am not suggesting that you should quit, but it is a possibility if the process is too messy).
> - If you can't reproduce something, then telling us this lets us work on getting better failcases. Especially if you give us guidance in that process. Without saying "can't reproduce", we can't tell the difference between that and a missed report.
I don't think we're missing too many. It does happen though.
> I've been developing software solutions, commercial and open source, for 15|PLS| years. I know about running beta programs. I know about participating in beta programs. Bug reports that appear to go into a black hole are the quickest way to annoy your testing audience.
Well, ditto the experience here. We just don't agree. I think we also may be moving faster than software businesses have in the past. I'm sure there is a cost to that.
> Squashing my responses is low class, however. Especially when it didn't even approximate flamage, and actually contained requests for ways to better support you.
Yours, in lower class,
JimH