ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
Subject Re: [Bug 7153] - Need additional Microsoft Visual SourceSafe Tasks
Date Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:43:34 GMT
From: "Magesh Umasankar" <>

> From: "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
> What frustrates me as a committer:
> 1. Bug reports that are not proven as
>    bugs (using Junit tests).

For this to happen, it means that every ANT user needs to download
the sources from CVS to get the test framework for ANT.
It needs to understand the framework (not easy). Never mind
being aware and understand JUnit. (Not something that every
user needs to know). 

I think this is a very hi mark. If you say, submit a buildfile
that shows the problem, well that is a different issue.

> 2. Patches to bugs/enhancement requests
>    that do not contain Junit tests that 
>    prove that the patch fixes the bug, by 
>    providing JUnit tests that fail before 
>    patch is applied and pass after patch 
>    is applied.

I have no problem with this in principle. But again I think a
buildfile showing the problem should be enough. After all
external users do not need to learn our automated QA
before they can do something.

> 3. Patches that do not care about backwards
>    compatibility.

How many of those have been rejected officially
anotated on Bugzilla and indicating to the submitter
what the problem is? You cannot assume that everyone
in the world has the same mindset as the submitters
about Java 1.1. I mean how many people rememner any more
whether this or that API was in 1.0 or 1.1.
This is why you guys are committers and the rest are not.

> 4. Patches that rely on the committer to
>    perform documentation patches, if any.

Send them back with a note. But speak about it.

> 5. Patches to tasks that I cannot compile
>    myself or execute myself because of
>    dependencies on external tools.

So what do you want, that people do not try to fix things?
This is one of the reasons I have pushed so much for <antlib>
because this problem is due to the complete lack of modularity
of the current source. Once ANT-DEV accepted those tasks
in the first place, you are stuck with it, unfortunately.

> I know it may be asking for a lot, but, if the
> patch contains lots of tests, documentation
> patches and the code patch as well, it would
> get committed faster.

But if you were to anotate the bugs with what you think is missing,
then maybe you will get the missing things sooner. Maybe we need
additional states for a bug (e.g., "Incomplete PATCH Submission").

> With all this said, I did do a sweep
> of BugZilla patches a month or so back, 
> IIRC and applied all of those that
> I was comfortable with - so I would say 
> patches haven't been lingering there for 
> a very long time.

Did you tell the submitters the problems you found on the other bugs?

Jose Alberto

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message