![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I have spent, I kid you not, the better part of the past 5 work days trying to figure out the source of an arcane publishing problem that results in English language titles occasionally appearing in the tables of contents of non-English-language documents. It's entirely too arcane to go into here. If you will forgive me for being vague, it results from Thing A (which is a little counterintuitive but needs to happen to keep the software usable) combined with Thing B (which is a little counterintuitive but has sound reasons behind it), followed by Thing C (which is basically dumb behavior and in my opinion, a bug).
So, I filed a bug report, where I tried to explain in as comprehensible a way as possible that "We have a problem because Thing A --> Thing B --> Thing C, and I think the solution is to have the software not do Thing C, which arguably it really shouldn't do according to the spec, which I have linked here." The title of the bug, by the way, is basically, "Thing C should not happen."
I got back a "Sorry, why can't you just not do that in the first place? And also, do you want a fix for Thing A, Thing B, or Thing C?"
So I wrote back an even simpler explanation of the problem, with diagrams. And reiterated, "The problem here is Thing C."
I have just been offered a solution that prevents Thing A from happening. Yeah, the one that "needs to happen to keep the software usable." I have just written back explaining why that is not a fix from my point of view, and reiterating, once again, that the problem is Thing C.
I'm starting to worry here that the real solution is going to end up being Ugly Error-Prone Workaround D, which I came up with while I was writing my second bug update, but explicitly nixed because it was a pain in the butt and people would forget to do it correctly and not catch the error until the document came back from translation.
Sigh.
So, I filed a bug report, where I tried to explain in as comprehensible a way as possible that "We have a problem because Thing A --> Thing B --> Thing C, and I think the solution is to have the software not do Thing C, which arguably it really shouldn't do according to the spec, which I have linked here." The title of the bug, by the way, is basically, "Thing C should not happen."
I got back a "Sorry, why can't you just not do that in the first place? And also, do you want a fix for Thing A, Thing B, or Thing C?"
So I wrote back an even simpler explanation of the problem, with diagrams. And reiterated, "The problem here is Thing C."
I have just been offered a solution that prevents Thing A from happening. Yeah, the one that "needs to happen to keep the software usable." I have just written back explaining why that is not a fix from my point of view, and reiterating, once again, that the problem is Thing C.
I'm starting to worry here that the real solution is going to end up being Ugly Error-Prone Workaround D, which I came up with while I was writing my second bug update, but explicitly nixed because it was a pain in the butt and people would forget to do it correctly and not catch the error until the document came back from translation.
Sigh.
Grown up galleries
Date: 2016-07-10 10:57 am (UTC)android phone widgets android market download ehlgeschlagen cam video chat earn money with android apps apk de free store
http://games.android.telrock.net/?page.katelin
chat and dating sites free strip poker games apps for youtube download media players for android best android phones 2015 uk