Based on Amaury's comments in Dev Slack channel
Explain that development process prioritizes fixing bugs when found, above other tasks
Details
Details
- Reviewers
deadalnix schancel jasonbcox - Group Reviewers
Restricted Project - Commits
- rSTAGINGdbb2998a5996: Add comment on fixing bugs to CONTRIBUTING.md
rABCdbb2998a5996: Add comment on fixing bugs to CONTRIBUTING.md
Amaury should check that the wording reflects how he wants the process to work
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rABC Bitcoin ABC
- Branch
- Fix-bugs
- Lint
Lint Passed - Unit
No Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 2343 Build 2821: Bitcoin ABC Buildbot (legacy) Build 2820: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
| CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
|---|---|---|
| 56 ↗ | (On Diff #3527) | Although I agree with this in principle, it doesn't apply in practice when some bugs require massive changes. This strategy doesn't apply very well for bugs requiring weeks/months worth of work. For large bugs like this, a conversation will almost always be necessary to triage the issue. |
| CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
|---|---|---|
| 56 ↗ | (On Diff #3527) | I agree with you @jasonbcox . This principle however makes it clear that fixing the bug is the high priority and the charge of proof is that the fix is expensive rather than it is cheap. These are guidelines so they should be understood as "do this, unless there is a good reason not to" |
Comment Actions
Add comment explaining that these are guidelines for the normal and expected process.
Developers can and should deviate from them when they have good reason to do so.