Re: Verifying fixes?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 4/23/20, 12:11 PM, "Jonas Hahnfeld" <address@hidden> wrote:

Am Donnerstag, den 23.04.2020, 17:26 +0000 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
> As I was reviewing Jonas's test review environment on GitLab, I noticed that 
> there were tons of closed issues that had not been verified.
> 
> I went back and looked on SourceForge, and found that we have 587 issues that 
> are listed with status of Fixed and do not have the label Fixed_2_21_1 (which 
> has not yet been released, so they cannot be verified).
> 
> I think our long delay between releases as we worked out the bugs in our 
> release system got us out of the habit of Verifying the fixes.
> 
> Do you believe we should Verify the fixes, or should we just leave the issues 
> closed without verification?  I'm willing to spend some time doing the 
> verification, if we think it's valuable to do so.

So what does "Verify" mean, making sure that the bug is indeed fixed?
(I can't imagine how this makes sense for patches.)

CDS-> It means making sure that the commit is in fact in the commit history of 
the listed version.  And it's also a good idea to check the regression tests.  
See 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.21/Documentation/contributor/bug-squad-checklists 
under "Regular maintenance".

CDS-> I'm not sure that we need to continue to do this, but we do have that as 
part of our process.  That's why I asked.

Carl