Re: Duplicate radars: good or bad? (Was: Re: Building 10.6' ld64)
Re: Duplicate radars: good or bad? (Was: Re: Building 10.6' ld64)
- Subject: Re: Duplicate radars: good or bad? (Was: Re: Building 10.6' ld64)
- From: Terry Lambert <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 03:00:18 -0700
On Sep 4, 2009, at 7:03 PM, Steve Checkoway <email@hidden> wrote:
On Sep 4, 2009, at 10:00 AM, William Siegrist wrote:
The Darwin Team is aware of the request for libunwind. I'll put
down another vote for it, so no need to file more radars or emails.
Comments like this confuse me since other @apple.com people have
said that radars are the only way Apple knows what people are
wanting and duplicate radars show more interest.
For example:
On Oct 29, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Chris Espinosa wrote:
On Oct 29, 2007, at 5:10 PM, David Catmull wrote:
On Oct 29, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Chris Hanson <email@hidden> wrote:
Don't let a resolution of
"duplicate" keep you from filing bugs.
It ought to be just the opposite: it means you're not the only one
complaining about the issue, which should be encouraging.
It is, in fact. Many teams (mine included) put a premium on high-
dup-count bugs, and the Mac OS X Project Office usually gives
recognition and a small prize for the engineer who fixed the bug
with higest dup count in a given release
So come to work for us. We have a jr kernel team position open.
Or if you care that much, you will code.
Mention me so I get the bonus.
-- Terry
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden