[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Axiom-developer] Re: Close Issues -> Close Fricas Issues

From: Bill Page
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Re: Close Issues -> Close Fricas Issues
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:56:15 -0500


On 13 Dec 2007 08:08:05 +0100, Martin Rubey wrote:
> ...
> > > 2) By magic, or Bill Page, we introduce the possibility of closing
> > >     issues for any subset of {axiom, open-axiom, fricas}.  I have
> > >     no idea how that could work, however.  In particular, if one
> > >     selects "open issues", what subset of issues does he get then?
> > >
> >
> > No, I think that is too complicated. What I would like to do is to have
> > bug reports that are specific to each version/fork. Right now this is
> > not the case. But what I think we should do as issues are reviews
> > and/or closed in a particular system, and if the issue is still outstanding
> > in one or more of the other systems, I think we should clone the bug
> > reports (make copies for each system) and then close the ones where
> > the bug is fixed. I know that this might seem like extra work, but
> > copying these reports is really pretty easy just using cut-and-paste
> > in edit mode.
> I disagree.  Most bug reports will relate to the algebra, and thus affect
> all versions of axiom.  Cloning all these reports means duplicate effort.

I do not think there is any significant duplication of effort. In each
case it is necessary to check that the bug is fixed in a given
version/fork of Axiom. Making a copy of the issue report and changing
the "Axiom Version" to point to that version, then refreshing the page
should make the bug disappear. Really only then it makes sense to
close that report - for that version/fork of Axiom.

> I guess the simplest solution is to replace the "status" categories
> as follows:
> open   ... open in all versions
> closed ... closed in all versions
> closed in FriCAS
> closed in OpenAxiom
> closed in Axiom
> open in FriCAS  --- closed in Axiom and OpenAxiom
> open in OpenAxiom
> open in Axiom
> many of the others are not needed or could be merged:
> assigned, revised, postponed -> not needed
> pending, planned, testing -> merge with fix proposed
> not reproducible, need more info -> merge
> I think that would be much better organized.

I am not against revising the status categories so they are more
specific and better organized but I do think it is essential that we
treat all versions/forks of Axiom on an equal footing on the
NewSynthesis Axiom Wiki. Doing things the way you suggest does not
seem sufficiently equitable to me.

Bill Page.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]