This question comes from the perspective of a business analyst at the project site who identifies/tests issues which are fixed by a remote group.

Say we receive a patch for issue A which resolves issue A yet causes issue B (which was previously working functionality). It seems like we have two options (or suggest something else) which are either accept the patch and create a new issue B, or reject the patch since it introduced the regression issue. Assuming that both issues are of equal severity, is there reason to prefer one of the options?

  • How are issues related to the economics of your arrangement with remote group and the customer? – Mark Phillips May 24 '12 at 16:44

Typically you'll reject the patch, since the issues are of equal severity. You have a known issue already, but patch A gives you issue B, which could have other side effects (devil you know vs the devil you don't).

Hope that helps, let me know if there are questions.

  • +1 for the idiom! "Devil you know vs the devil you don't". – jmort253 May 26 '12 at 0:24

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.