Re: Less radical proposal (was Re: Radical proposal: skip 3.4)

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>]

Phil Edwards wrote:
> So, here's a suggestion:  during stage 3, this rule should be more
> vigourously ... eh, "enforced" isn't quite the word I want, but it's close.
> For those two months, we really should be seeing more bugs fixed than
> new code committed.  Yah, I know fixing bugs isn't sexy, but getting our
> collective ass whomped by commercial compilers is even less sexy.  Yah, I
> know nobody here wants to be the unpopular bully who vetos perfectly good
> new dev work during those two months, but I think it'll still be needed.
I've been fixing bugs.  But it takes me a lot longer than it takes me to 
implement structural improvements.  :-/

Actually, what takes longer isn't *fixing* the bugs per se; it's 
tracking them down.  I like doing that, but (for me) it's sloooow work.

Anyone here good at tracking down bugs?  :-)  (This goes beyond 
regression hunting in the common case where the patch causing the 
regression was fixing some other bug.)