Massive Konqueror Regression

[James Richard Tyrer]

Stephan Kulow wrote:
> Am Sonntag 14 August 2005 23:26 schrieb David van Hoose:
> 
>>Then I'm sorry to say it, but they need to learn how to write regression
>>tests. You create the tests from throwing together an example for EVERY
>>object of concern. It is almost as much work writing the tests initially as
>>it is writing the code of which you are testing. However, it pays off in the
>>long run since you know everything works. How do you think Microsoft does
>>it? Do you honestly think that they blindly release something? No. They test
>>it with homemade examples. If KDE wants to be the best, the KDE team needs
>>to start thinking like a commercial entity when it comes to testing. Coding
>>something, testing it with a few basic examples is not going to make a
>>project great. You need proper regression tests.
> 
> 
> Hi smart ass!

That is really uncalled for.  Maybe he was a little presumptuous, but 
listen to what he has to say.  What he says is true.

So, lets say that we need to figure out how to write *better* regression 
tests.

> How come you're subscribed to this list if all you want is putting down other
> people's work? 

I see nothing here that is putting down other peoples work.  His intent 
is clearly to suggest how to improve the work.  Yes, to improve 
something, you need to first find what is wrong, but that is not a put down!

> Did you even bother looking at our regression tests?

He probably didn't, and there is nothing wrong with suggesting that 
looking at them is the place for him to start helping devise better ones.

It appears to me that these are the remarks of another engineering type 
person.  If somehow the hackers can get past taking remarks like these 
as personal insults, engineering types could be a great help to the project.

Engineers are taught to find what is wrong with something and fix it. 
Engineering types are direct.  We can be very direct to the point of 
being blunt.  It is, perhaps, difficult to accept this, but if an 
engineer tells you exactly what is wrong with a piece of software and 
how he would fix it, this is not in any way an insult.  You have to 
realize that such an analysis and suggested cure is helpful and it is 
certainly intended as help.

What is needed?  We need to put such people to work on QA and the coders 
need to learn to accept what the QA people say and to accept that it is 
probably just as important in a large project as writing the actual code.

But, first, (if you really want more manpower for the KDE project) 
various developers need to stop thinking that personal attacks are the 
appropriate response when someone says something that they disagree 
with.  Point out where he is wrong if that is what you think.  If he is 
an engineering type, he will accept this.  Try to tell him as exactly as 
possible.  Argue the facts, don't resort to logical fallacies.

-- 
JRT