<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Free clue</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.xcski.com/2008/05/16/free-clue/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.xcski.com/2008/05/16/free-clue</link>
	<description>Everything I used to bore people on newsgroups and mailing lists with, now in one inconvenient place.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:33:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tina Marie</title>
		<link>http://blog.xcski.com/2008/05/16/free-clue#comment-90531</link>
		<dc:creator>Tina Marie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 18:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.xcski.com/?p=1348#comment-90531</guid>
		<description>I saw an interesting variation on this yesterday.  For various reasons, many of which were my fault, we didn't have a build for a week.  So imagine my surprise when I got a bug back Wednesday that I'd fixed Monday - how could a bug have failed QA if they hadn't gotten a build that included the fix?  

Turned out that they read my description of the bug, and decided they didn't really think that was the underlying problem, so they returned it to me, untested.

You can imagine the level of snarkiness in my response.  And when they did get a build yesterday afternoon?  Turned out it really _was_ fixed by my change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw an interesting variation on this yesterday.  For various reasons, many of which were my fault, we didn&#8217;t have a build for a week.  So imagine my surprise when I got a bug back Wednesday that I&#8217;d fixed Monday - how could a bug have failed QA if they hadn&#8217;t gotten a build that included the fix?  </p>
<p>Turned out that they read my description of the bug, and decided they didn&#8217;t really think that was the underlying problem, so they returned it to me, untested.</p>
<p>You can imagine the level of snarkiness in my response.  And when they did get a build yesterday afternoon?  Turned out it really _was_ fixed by my change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
