> On Saturday, 12 of April 2008, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:58:42 -0400,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:23:54 EDT, Mark Lord said:
> > >
> > >> You still keep refering to it as "your (my) bug".
> > >> It's not. I had nothing to do with it, other than stumbling over it.
> > >
> > > Like it or not, when you're the owner of the only box that can reliably
> > > reproduce an error condition, it's your bug.
> >
> > Thanks for the advice. I'll keep it in mind next time I have to decide
> > whether to report a bug I'm stumbling over.
>
> Well, the fact is, reporting bugs is always welcome.
>
> However, it may not be immediately obvious what causes the bug to appear
> as well as the bug need not be readily reproducible on any other system than
> yours, at least at the moment.
>
> In which case whether or not the bug will be fixed depends on the reporter.
> Namely, if the reporter wants and has the time to provide developers with
> additional information, the bug has a good chance to be fixed. Otherwise,
> it'll probably stay there until there's a more persistent reporter or it's
> fixed as a result of a related change.
>
> So, if people ask you to do a bisection, they probably mean "we don't see
> what the problem is and can't reproduce it, so please get us more information,
> otherwise we won't know how to fix it". In that case, you could provide them
> with a reproducible test case just as well.
>
> That said, there may be some developers who just don't want to spend time on
> analysing code and put the burden of finding the offending change on the
> reporter, but I don't think it's common practice.
