develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2018

[perl #133311] BBC GRANTM/Encoding-FixLatin-1.04.tar.gz

From:
Karl Williamson via RT
Date:
July 7, 2018 21:45
Subject:
[perl #133311] BBC GRANTM/Encoding-FixLatin-1.04.tar.gz
Message ID:
rt-4.0.24-8715-1530999913-1156.133311-15-0@perl.org
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 18:43:37 -0700, public@khwilliamson.com wrote:
> On 06/30/2018 11:15 AM, Andreas Koenig wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 08:56:01 -0600, Karl Williamson
> >>>>>> <public@khwilliamson.com> said:
> >
> >    > On 06/29/2018 12:12 AM, Andreas Koenig wrote:
> >   >>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:02:19 -0700, "James E Keenan via RT"
> >   >>>>>>> <perlbug-followup@perl.org> said:
> >   >>
> >   >> > I cannot reproduce this, at least in this typical case:
> >   >>
> >   >> Please note that the report already has a commit ID.
> >   >>
> >
> >    > But that wasn't Jim's question.
> >
> > Jim's posting revealed that he tried with some 5.28.0. And since I
> > was
> > about to rush out the door I sent a quick hint that at least one of
> > you
> > two should understand. You know, bleadperl has since moved on to
> > 5.29.0.
> 
> I did not pick up on this hint, nor that Jim hadn't used a version of
> blead that is broken.  I can understand how, in your haste, you didn't
> say clearly what you intended.  Just about everybody says things that
> are unclear, even when unhurried.  Perhaps you can understand how
> someone, like me, might have missed your intent.
> 
> >
> >    > We can't fix it if we can't reproduce it.
> >
> > Are you saying you, Karl, have tried yourself and could not
> > reproduce?
> > Or are you saying, if Jim could not, then you won't even try
> > yourself?
> > If the latter, then I urge you to show some effort yourself. If the
> > former, then please provide the details that may lead to interesting
> > insights.
> 
> Your above statement is troubling to me.  You give two options,
> apparently assuming that one or the other must be true, and if the
> second is true, you tentatively are chiding me for being, for lack of
> a
> better word, "lazy".
> 
> But in fact neither statement is true.  I have learned to try to be
> careful to realize that often there are other possibilities I haven't
> considered in any given situation.  That makes me a better programmer,
> and happier in life.
> 
> When I used the word "We", I was referring to the project as a whole.
> If your earlier email had been clearer, I would have realized that Jim
> hadn't tested on a broken blead.  But when I wrote the sentence you
> quoted, I believed that Jim had tried and failed to reproduce it on a
> broken blead.  That made it seem quite possible that this problem
> might
> surface only under some particular combination of Configure options.
> It
> would be a waste of my time to try all combinations when someone else
> already should have at their finger tips the correct combination.  I
> could spend that time on more productive uses.
> 
> Almost certainly the reason this ticket didn't go through the first
> time
> is that you did fail to include the output of 'perl -V'.  That's been
> the experience of many posters.
> 
> Given that I thought this bug didn't always reproduce, I waited a
> couple
> of days to see what further communication there was.  When there was
> none, I asked for the perl -V output.
> 
> Your statement is especially troubling since I wrote to you privately
> when I first saw the ticket, thanking you for finding the bug, and
> telling you I would work on it this weekend.
> 
> Did you not get this email?
> 
> Did you forget you got this email?
> 
> Did you not believe what I said?
> 
> Is there another possibility I haven't considered?
> 
> I am unaware of blowing off any ticket you have filed that concerned
> an
> area of the core that I feel responsible for.  If there are such then
> I'm sorry; please let me know which so that they can be addressed in
> the
> open, and I can try to regain your confidence in my willingness to fix
> what I break.
> 
> If there aren't any, then I'm sorry for you, because that means your
> life is unnecessarily negative.  Hanlon's razor is a recipe for
> happier
> living.
> 
> Let me sum up.  If you had used 'perl -V' initially, it would
> ultimately
> have saved you time, Jim time, me time, and everyone reading this
> time.
> Same for if you had been clearer in your response to Jim.  These are
> both easy mistakes to make, and are understandable and forgivable.  We
> all do things like this on a regular basis.  But in this case, it
> wasn't
> me who was failing to exert effort.  And it is counter productive to
> the
> project to tentatively chide someone, as you did me.
> 
> The bug, BTW, is fixed in blead.  Thank you for finding and reporting
> it.  I'll close the ticket at some point after the systems to do so
> come
> back up.
> 

The commit that fixed it was b1d21918e268271d791ff30e83cf9c4f8c351707

-- 
Karl Williamson

---
via perlbug:  queue: perl5 status: open
https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=133311



nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About