3 ms·

That has not been my experience. If it's important the bugs tend to get fixed quickly. The developers can't fix bugs they don't know about. If you find people t

That has not been my experience. If it's important the bugs tend to get fixed quickly. The developers can't fix bugs they don't know about. If you find people to be unresponsive, feel free to help chip in by fixing bugs yourself or sponsoring someone else to do so. Or just stick to an old version. This isn't some mysterious process that you have no insight into. You can go the GCC/Audacity/Inkscape bug trackers now and see what is actually happening.

mojuba 7y ago
You know I want to be very honest about this (since I've already got a lot of downvotes in this post, no harm in getting more :) Having been in this industry for 30 years I firmly believe that bugs should be fixed by those who introduced them. This: GCC 7.5 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 7 branch containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 7.4 with more than 215 bugs fixed since the previous release. is not normal (215 bugs!) and no, I'm not going to go and pick a bug to fix in this source code. I'd rather contribute to LLVM which seems much cleaner and higher quality overall.
- cycloptic 7y ago
  Then you should know that sometimes the best person is not available. If you want to fix bugs in LLVM then I'm sure you will be welcomed.
  - mojuba 7y ago
    Sure, but I'm talking about the style of programming where people throw code left and right with the expectation that others (users, QA) will find bugs, catalog them nicely, assign numbers, and then hopefully someone else will fix all of it. This is the attitude in both commercial and open/free worlds. Whereas the way it should be is: you are responsible for testing your own code and changes, not users, not your QA department. You are personally responsible. Of course you will make mistakes, but not 200 at a time. You might have multiple issues in your code, but it is fine as long as you have tested as much as you could before committing/pushing.
    - cycloptic 7y ago
      That might sound good when you write it but is not at all how anything ever works out practically.

mojuba 7y ago

You know I want to be very honest about this (since I've already got a lot of downvotes in this post, no harm in getting more :) Having been in this industry for 30 years I firmly believe that bugs should be fixed by those who introduced them. This: GCC 7.5 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 7 branch containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 7.4 with more than 215 bugs fixed since the previous release. is not normal (215 bugs!) and no, I'm not going to go and pick a bug to fix in this source code. I'd rather contribute to LLVM which seems much cleaner and higher quality overall.

cycloptic 7y ago
Then you should know that sometimes the best person is not available. If you want to fix bugs in LLVM then I'm sure you will be welcomed.
- mojuba 7y ago
  Sure, but I'm talking about the style of programming where people throw code left and right with the expectation that others (users, QA) will find bugs, catalog them nicely, assign numbers, and then hopefully someone else will fix all of it. This is the attitude in both commercial and open/free worlds. Whereas the way it should be is: you are responsible for testing your own code and changes, not users, not your QA department. You are personally responsible. Of course you will make mistakes, but not 200 at a time. You might have multiple issues in your code, but it is fine as long as you have tested as much as you could before committing/pushing.
  - cycloptic 7y ago
    That might sound good when you write it but is not at all how anything ever works out practically.