6 ms·

> "it's a feature request not a bug" shows Stephen did not even understand the problem he introduced. He clarifies a little bit further down the thread: > It'

by chias 6y ago

> "it's a feature request not a bug" shows Stephen did not even understand the problem he introduced. He clarifies a little bit further down the thread: > It's not a bug because it's working exactly as designed. We're very aware that you regard it as a misdesign. If a project / community has adopted specific definitions for given words such as "bug", "feature request", etc., then IMO you should not get mad at people for using them as defined. You may feel strongly that the auto-updating feature is a terrible idea in application, and you may even disagree with this project's decision to define a "bug" as "something that isn't working as designed", and that's fine. But I don't think it suggests that Stephen does not understand the issue, or did not read the thread.

p1necone 6y ago
I think that's a silly definition of a bug. If it breaks the product, it's a bug. It doesn't matter if it was created at dev time or design time. Hell, a huge chunk of dev work is rethinking design decisions that are misguided/under specified/break things because you only see these issues once you start having to implement details.
lopatin 6y ago
"bug" vs "feature" is a silly debate about semantics until someone uses it as a justification to push back releasing a fix. Bugs get fixed immediately, but feature requests can wait. And also, who says that mis-designed features aren't bugs? In this case, they designed a bug, and shipped it.
- jameshart 6y ago
  Introducing an entirely new user-facing dialog option into the upgrade install flow doesn't sound like a 'bug fix' to me in any system. That's completely new UX, localization, security concerns, documentation... Autoupgrading might totally be a misfeature for your usecase, but it's how this program works. If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it.
  - lopatin 6y ago
    > but it's how this program works Or how it doesn't work, in this case. > If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it And use what? There are no alternatives. Should I quit my job while I'm at it? Maybe I can just downgrade it .... oh wait ..
  - asidiali 6y ago
    Implementing new UI required to fix a bug due to functionality oversight, is still a bug. This broke production environments. That is a bug. Bugs can introduce new development to meet acceptance criteria, if that is the right way to solve the bug. Edit: kelnos accurately pointed out that I should have said development environment, and not production.
    - jameshart 6y ago
      No, a bug in the new release that the autodeployer autodeployed was the bug. The autodeployer worked flawlessly. Presumably it also would flawlessly autodeploy the fix for that bug when it gets released.
      - asidiali 6y ago
        > No, a bug in the release...was the bug. So, there was a bug. A UX bug. Bugs aren’t software-exclusive. I may be misunderstanding your point.
        pvorb 6y ago
        But still, if there was no bug in 3.0.2, people wouldn't have tried to downgrade to 3.0.1 again. So the bug was not in 3.0.0, nor in 3.0.1, but only in 3.0.2.
        lopatin 6y ago
        > people wouldn't have tried to downgrade to 3.0.1 again What's the point of having versions if you can't install them?
- asidiali 6y ago
  Exactly. The fact they pushed back for this to be fixed under a new feature release vs bug hotfix, is simply salt on the wound.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dkoala223 6y ago
similar to "feature not a bug" happened here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26468421 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26468421 the dev said its not a bug visual impaired users cant see things in his app and went full agressive on people reporting. so hard he blocked any new people from reporting issues too and hid comments/discussion about imrpoving the situation someone else said "this is how you get forked" and they are right for foss things, but docker isnt so trickier
- arwineap 6y ago
  Sure, I don't think they will be able to be forked in the traditional sense, but docker is not the only container runtime. It would be reasonable for people to build better tooling around rkt, or jump on the podman bandwagon

by chias 6y ago

p1necone 6y ago

I think that's a silly definition of a bug. If it breaks the product, it's a bug. It doesn't matter if it was created at dev time or design time. Hell, a huge chunk of dev work is rethinking design decisions that are misguided/under specified/break things because you only see these issues once you start having to implement details.

lopatin 6y ago

"bug" vs "feature" is a silly debate about semantics until someone uses it as a justification to push back releasing a fix. Bugs get fixed immediately, but feature requests can wait. And also, who says that mis-designed features aren't bugs? In this case, they designed a bug, and shipped it.

jameshart 6y ago
Introducing an entirely new user-facing dialog option into the upgrade install flow doesn't sound like a 'bug fix' to me in any system. That's completely new UX, localization, security concerns, documentation... Autoupgrading might totally be a misfeature for your usecase, but it's how this program works. If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it.
- lopatin 6y ago
  > but it's how this program works Or how it doesn't work, in this case. > If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it And use what? There are no alternatives. Should I quit my job while I'm at it? Maybe I can just downgrade it .... oh wait ..
- asidiali 6y ago
  Implementing new UI required to fix a bug due to functionality oversight, is still a bug. This broke production environments. That is a bug. Bugs can introduce new development to meet acceptance criteria, if that is the right way to solve the bug. Edit: kelnos accurately pointed out that I should have said development environment, and not production.
  - jameshart 6y ago
    No, a bug in the new release that the autodeployer autodeployed was the bug. The autodeployer worked flawlessly. Presumably it also would flawlessly autodeploy the fix for that bug when it gets released.
    - asidiali 6y ago
      > No, a bug in the release...was the bug. So, there was a bug. A UX bug. Bugs aren’t software-exclusive. I may be misunderstanding your point.
      - pvorb 6y ago
        But still, if there was no bug in 3.0.2, people wouldn't have tried to downgrade to 3.0.1 again. So the bug was not in 3.0.0, nor in 3.0.1, but only in 3.0.2.
        lopatin 6y ago
        > people wouldn't have tried to downgrade to 3.0.1 again What's the point of having versions if you can't install them?
asidiali 6y ago
Exactly. The fact they pushed back for this to be fixed under a new feature release vs bug hotfix, is simply salt on the wound.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dkoala223 6y ago

similar to "feature not a bug" happened here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26468421 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26468421 the dev said its not a bug visual impaired users cant see things in his app and went full agressive on people reporting. so hard he blocked any new people from reporting issues too and hid comments/discussion about imrpoving the situation someone else said "this is how you get forked" and they are right for foss things, but docker isnt so trickier

arwineap 6y ago
Sure, I don't think they will be able to be forked in the traditional sense, but docker is not the only container runtime. It would be reasonable for people to build better tooling around rkt, or jump on the podman bandwagon