redwoodmonkey

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   Code to fix problems, even in theory, isn't unnecessary. Statistically, changes I did were very unlikely to produce bugs. I wrote about this in my post about why you shouldn't do code reviews: https://www.corbinstreehou
2. 2.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   FWIW, I would check in these fixes. Sometimes they would work, sometimes they won't.
3. 3.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   Yeah, it is stupid. I used to see this all the time.
4. 4.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   I could easily see it go either way; it really depends on the bug. Some obvious issue, like "this button should do X but it does Y" can be verified by almost anyone. But some issues need the attention of the original author to rea
5. 5.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   The sysdiagnose does contain useful information that is useful for certain bugs. If an app crashes, then the crash report is essential. The log file is also (sometimes) useful. It is easier to ask for a sysdiagnose that gathers the kitchen
6. 6.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   I am the author. I always do dot upgrades, as they are (usually) security updates. I wouldn't say I am "stuck" on any particular OS; I choose to remain on it for stability.
7. 7.▲
   by redwoodmonkey 8y ago

   I agree with you - Radar was a great bug tracking system. The fault isn't with the program, but the process. -- corbin