[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: issue verification

From: Jean Abou Samra
Subject: Re: issue verification
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:56:38 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0


Le 18/09/2020 à 11:15, Phil Holmes a écrit :

I don't know if this isn't clear, but just to state the original point of verifying issues.

If the change is claimed to fix a bug, we compile the previously buggy code with the release in which the bug is claimed fixed and check that the bug is no longer there.  It it has really disappeared, we change the status of the issue from Fixed to Verified.  i.e. we are certain that the bug is no longer there.

If the change is to provide updated functionality, then it can be really quite hard to verify the new functionality, and in any case the patch review system should do that.  So we simply check the patch was pushed into the claimed build.  If it's clear that it was, we mark the status as Verified.

That was the original intention of verifying issues.

Thanks for the insight.

So, Michael and I verified nearly all issues in Status::Fixed.
The ones remaining are listed here:[]=Status%3A%3AFixed&not[milestone_title]=2.21.7

Among these,

which I don't know how to test (Jonas?).

The others (5 items) are Windows-related. Maybe Michael or someone
else with access to a Windows machine can go over them?

Otherwise, part of the work was extremely simple, namely check that
the commits had made it into some branch under release/, which is fast;
and part of it was much harder, when trying to reproduce memory-related
bugs, for example. I reopened a few of these issues.

This doesn't answer Jonas' initial question: what should be done,
in terms of policies, with regard to issue verification? I don't
know. Personally I think it's not really needed as long as every
bug fix contains a regression test.

Speaking of regression tests, I also went through comparison pages
from "2.21.6 vs. 2.21.5" to "2.21.2 vs. 2.21.1" included. Honestly,
I've had my share of this; could somebody jump in to verify the
last two pages as well? These are:

Depending on your time and energy available, you may even go
farther. Or simply (I mean simple, not costless) verify the
entire test suite:

That'll be all for today.


reply via email to

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