4 ms·
> ...if it had been thoroughly tested was shown to have certain regressions but no worse security regressions? You'd have to test to know this, and there is no
by overfeed 4mo ago
> ...if it had been thoroughly tested was shown to have certain regressions but no worse security regressions?
You'd have to test to know this, and there is no evidence that tridge did this regression testing - or ask Claude to find possible regressions caused by proposed changes. If tridge did test for regressions, but chose not to document the regression, then it's still negligence, regardless of the tools pr processes involved.
- Lerc 4mo agoAre you saying that it is irresponsible to test for regressions and to not document the ones you didn't find or that you think it is reasonable to expect regression tests for every possible regression?
- overfeed 4mo agoNo, I did not say any of that.
- Sacho 4mo agoWhat were you trying to say? Because what you wrote is what parent responded to. > there is no evidence that tridge did this regression testing What evidence would you be looking for? New tests, like the ones added in the AI-assisted commits? What other evidence? > If tridge did test for regressions, but chose not to document the regression Presumably you weren't trying to imply here that tridge found a regression and decided to ship the code anyway; so parent went to a natural assumption - do you think testing for regressions finds all regressions?
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]