Remove bug and fix bug.

I have never thought about it much. When my company take more aggressive actions on removing bug instead of fixing bug. I didn't understand it until later.

Do you know the difference between remove bug and fix bug?

Remove bug is not about fixing it, but, to remove it. It is a subtle difference that makes a big impact on quality of service.

what?

remove bug != fix bug

@BitFlipper: I'm guessing he's talking about removing a buggy feature entirely rather than fixing the bug so people can actually use the feature. In theory, I'd have to say "yes, that's terrible" but in reality I'm saying "whatever will keep whoever is paying you happy for now."

What do yo mean by 'remove bug' -- do you mean that if a feature has a bug it is entirely removed from the code-base rather than having the bug fixed?

Herbie

Don't agree. A bug is removed, when it does not occur. The bug is the consequence in the little place I work - that's why bugs have a cause.

@Bas:

That's pretty much it. Intead of fixing a formula that caused hydroxycut put people in hospital, the more immediate action is to not sell it. you Don't want to put people in danger.

While such action did not fix the bug, it stopped the further damage it causes. We All wished to actually fix it, like cancer. But, for now, we can only cut it out.

Or yeah, a feature that crashes or stop user from using the service, I believe removing the feature is the better immediate action. My company gave me some old bug to fix. If they didn't remove the feature, the bug is a lot more critical, which they don't have enough resources to rapidly fix everything.

@magicalclick: Yes, removing the feature is the best short-term solution, but fixing the bug and adding the feature back in should be the long-term goal.

@spivonious:

yeah, that's pretty much it. I guess I am just too dumb because when my company does that, I didn't see how important that is, until later on.