Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by godelski 345 days ago 

  > UNLESS YOU CAN VERIFY ITS FIXED
Ummm...

Yes?

Aren't we saying the same thing then?

We must be talking past one another. I'm (and others) are assuming they can't reproduce the bug. Assuming they aren't lying when they say so and assuming they've tried.

I mean let's take the trivial case. Assume user is dumb, deleted the files, made a bug report. Devs will never be able to reproduce unless user tells them they deleted everything 'on purpose'. That ends up with a permanently opened bug report no matter how much time you spend trying to fix the issue and no matter how many safety features you build in, right?
1 comments
redeeman 344 days ago
no, I am saying that I agree that you shouldnt mark it fixed until you know its fixed.

I am also saying that if they dont know for a fact its fixed, they should WARN PEOPLE IT MAY EAT DATA.

its 17 years!

link
godelski 344 days ago
Okay, then yes I misunderstood you. I mostly agree but it's also been 17 years and what are the odds that the offending code still exists? What are the odds that it's TB's fault?

I know people report the issue but googling I can find similar complaints across all major mail clients.

I just don't think there's enough information to make strong conclusions and I don't think California cancer warning labels work. I think they teach people to ignore warnings instead.

link