AWT : Automatic call to System.exit(0)

Alexandre Oliva oliva at
Sat Jun 19 20:37:15 PDT 1999

On Jun 19, 1999, Patrick Tullmann <tullmann at> wrote:

> *Browsing* 'Closed' might become difficult, but who really cares?

I do.  If we spend time classifying bug reports, it's just silly to
throw that information away just because the bug was fixed.  Category
information should be retained somehow.

> In my mind, the only reason to browse a category is to find the open
> bugs in the category (e.g., to find something to fix).

Isn't it easy enough to look for `unreplied' bug reports (assuming
that `pending' ones already have an `owner')?

> category, except its full of "closed" bugs.  Picking out just the
> open ones is impossible.

Do I have to explain again how to look for `open' bug reports?

> (Okay, currently Kaffe has 3 bugs in that category, so its really
> not hard, but do you want the accumulated history of all network bug
> reports to sit in that category for eternity?)

Precisely.  That's why there's a `net' category.  Bug reports
shouldn't change categories over time, otherwise I might not be able
to find them by searching in the category I knew they lived in.

>> ... since you can already know, in Jitterbug, whether a bug report
>> is open or not: if it is `pending' or `unreplied', it is open,
>> otherwise it is closed.

> Creating a 'fixed' category and moving bugs to 
> there when they're really fixed seems like a simple and painless
> solution.

If you think classifying bug reports is useless, we could probably
leave with just two categories: `open' and `closed'.

What you don't get is that the classification is not just for the
developers, when searching for open bug reports: users should also be
able to search the categories to find out which bugs have been fixed
and which have not.

> Not more difficult than adding the note 'Fixed' that currently
> litters the repository.

In fact, a useless note, given that it's redundant.

But it seems that I'm alone in the ``deep understanding'' of the
underlying assumptions of Jitterbug.  I wonder if Andrew Tridgell and
Dan Shearer share this sensation with me...  Or maybe it's I that just
don't get it, and the `Message type's are just a useless concept in
Jitterbug, that's going to be dropped in the next release... :-(

Alexandre Oliva IC-Unicamp, Bra[sz]il
{oliva,Alexandre.Oliva}  aoliva@{,}
*** E-mail about software projects will be forwarded to mailing lists

More information about the kaffe mailing list