Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Proposed revision of PEP 3 (using the issue tracker)

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Sun Feb 24 08:15:46 CET 2008 
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 I agree with Martin for both of these - 'works for me' and 'out of date'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.

-Brett
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list