From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug statistics Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:38:06 -0400 Message-ID: <87bpaxinz5.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <1focf1eb1p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <201006241959.12567.tassilo@member.fsf.org> <83hbkre7fj.fsf@gnu.org> <87vd9623zn.fsf@red-bean.com> <83zkyicgzh.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277581101 31484 80.91.229.12 (26 Jun 2010 19:38:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:38:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 26 21:38:19 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSbCi-0004RN-Bt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:38:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54126 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OSbCh-0004GW-Po for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:38:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58983 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OSbCa-0004GR-W9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:38:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSbCZ-00028l-S5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:38:08 -0400 Original-Received: from osh-net-219-98.onshore.net ([66.146.219.98]:44650 helo=sanpietro.red-bean.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSbCZ-00028e-Pj; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35090 helo=kfogel-work ident=kfogel) by sanpietro.red-bean.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OSbCY-0000bS-Jf; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 14:38:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83zkyicgzh.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:53:22 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126446 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> FWIW, when I've experienced this automated dup-finding in the web >> interface of other bug trackers, it has not been a nuisance -- on the >> contrary it was a great relief, because it helped me know I'm not >> wasting the developers' time with a duplicate report. (The majority of >> the time, it did find a dup of what I was about to file. Sometimes I >> was able to go to that existing report and add useful information.) >> >> For me it became one of those "never go back" features, like sexp motion >> in Emacs. > >That would put you into the ``have a lot of time on your hands'' >category, in my book. I have maybe 10 hours a week to work on Emacs. >I cannot invest any significant portion of that time on reading the >descriptions of bugs, without adversely affecting my productivity, >which is too low as it is. I almost always only need to read the subject of the duplicate bug to know it's the same as the one I'm about to report. In the cases where I need to dive into the description, that only adds another 20 seconds or so. These amounts of time are "lost in the noise" when compared to the amount of time it would take to actually file a new report. -K