[Python-Dev] Proposed revision of PEP 3 (using the issue tracker)
Steve Holden
steve at holdenweb.com
Sun Feb 24 14:32:49 CET 2008
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Ron Adam <rrr at ronadam.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> > Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> >> One issue to consider is also politeness. People sometimes complain that
>> >> they feel treated unfair if their report is declared "invalid" - they
>> >> surely believed it was a valid report, at the time they made it.
>> >
>> > I agree with Martin for both of these - 'works for me' and 'out of date'
>> > convey additional information to the originator of the bug, even if they
>> > don't make a signifcant difference from a development point of view.
>>
>> The term 'works for me' can be confused with 'solution/patch works for me'.
>> I've generally seen the phrase 'works for me' to mean agreement of a
>> proposed action of some sort.
>>
>> Maybe something along the lines of 'can not reproduce' would be better?
>
> I have to agree with Ron. I honestly thought "works for me" meant the
> solution worked. Something less ambiguous would be nice.
>
+1 for "cannot reproduce".
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list